Govt. of Gujarat vs imtiyajbhai yusufbhai malek Advocate - V D KAMLIYA — 1116/2025
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65aa,98(2),99. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 16th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJGS050015702025
Filing Number
1116/2025
Filing Date
19-Nov-2025
Registration No
1116/2025
Registration Date
19-Nov-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, SUTRAPADA
Judge
1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
16-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 23-Apr-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
716
Police Station
SUTRAPADA POLICE STATION - GIR SOMNATH DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Govt. of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.imtiyajbhai yusufbhai malek Advocate - V D KAMLIYA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
16-Mar-2026
Judegement
The Sutrapad First Class Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted the accused Imtiyazbhai (alias Ramo) of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act and BNS Code, finding insufficient evidence despite recovered contraband alcohol and a motorcycle with forged number plates. The court noted critical gaps in witness testimony, lack of technical expert evidence, and failure to establish a direct link between the prohibited articles and the accused, citing precedent that conviction cannot rest on procedural formality alone. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
16-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
09-Mar-2026
Judgement
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
12-Jan-2026
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
19-Nov-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
19-Nov-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 1116/2025
The Sutrapad First Class Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted the accused Imtiyazbhai (alias Ramo) of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act and BNS Code, finding insufficient evidence despite recovered contraband alcohol and a motorcycle with forged number plates. The court noted critical gaps in witness testimony, lack of technical expert evidence, and failure to establish a direct link between the prohibited articles and the accused, citing precedent that conviction cannot rest on procedural formality alone. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts