Government of Gujarat vs KHIMANAND AJABHAI MOVAR — 2793/2025
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65-a-a. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTA on 30th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJDW020039232025
Filing Number
2793/2025
Filing Date
26-Nov-2025
Registration No
2793/2025
Registration Date
26-Nov-2025
Court
CIVIL COURT, KHAMBHALIA
Judge
4-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
30-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTA
Last updated 12-Apr-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11185004251074
Police Station
JAM KHAMBHALIA POLICE STATION – DEVBHUMI DWARKA @ KHAMBHALIYA
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.KHIMANAND AJABHAI MOVAR
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
30-Mar-2026
Judegement
The court acquitted the accused of charges under the Prohibition Act, 1949 (Section 65(e)), finding insufficient evidence that he possessed country-made liquor without proper authorization. The prosecution failed to establish its case as the panchayat memo was unreliable and independent witnesses could not corroborate the seizure, while the court granted benefit of doubt to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
30-Mar-2026
Disposed
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
24-Mar-2026
Further Statement
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
07-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
24-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
05-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
01-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
10-Dec-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
26-Nov-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
26-Nov-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 2793/2025
The court acquitted the accused of charges under the Prohibition Act, 1949 (Section 65(e)), finding insufficient evidence that he possessed country-made liquor without proper authorization. The prosecution failed to establish its case as the panchayat memo was unreliable and independent witnesses could not corroborate the seizure, while the court granted benefit of doubt to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts