Govt. of Gujarat vs pravinbhai danabhai vaja Advocate - M R RATHOD — 1101/2025

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(a)(a). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 16th March 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJGS050015512025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1101/2025

Filing Date

18-11-2025

Registration No

1101/2025

Registration Date

18-11-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, SUTRAPADA

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

16th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

829

Police Station

SUTRAPADA POLICE STATION - GIR SOMNATH DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65(a)(a)

Petitioner(s)

Govt. of Gujarat

Respondent(s)

pravinbhai danabhai vaja Advocate - M R RATHOD

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

16-03-2026

Disposed

09-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

12-01-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

18-11-2025

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

Final Orders / Judgements

16-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Court Decision Summary The First Class Judicial Magistrate Court at Sutrapada acquitted Pravinbhai Danabhai Raja of charges under Section 65(A) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that the witness testimony (particularly the panchas) was unreliable, the investigation procedure was questionable, and critical evidentiary gaps existed—including lack of FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory) evidence, absence of proper seizure documentation, and failure to establish direct connection between the accused and the prohibited alcohol seized. The accused was acquitted and discharged, with the court citing precedent that courts should not waste time on trials lacking conviction prospects. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The First Class Judicial Magistrate Court at Sutrapada acquitted Pravinbhai Danabhai Raja of charges under Section 65(A) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that the witness testimony (particularly the panchas) was unreliable, the investigation procedure was questionable, and critical evidentiary gaps existed—including lack of FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory) evidence, absence of proper seizure documentation, and failure to establish direct connection between the accused and the prohibited alcohol seized. The accused was acquitted and discharged, with the court citing precedent that courts should not waste time on trials lacking conviction prospects. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, SUTRAPADA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case