Govt. of Gujarat vs vijaybhai masaribhai vaja Advocate - M R RATHOD — 1170/2025

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

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJGS050016352025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1170/2025

Filing Date

08-12-2025

Registration No

1170/2025

Registration Date

08-12-2025

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

154

Police Station

SUTRAPADA POLICE STATION - GIR SOMNATH DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65aa

Petitioner(s)

Govt. of Gujarat

Respondent(s)

vijaybhai masaribhai 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

Final Orders / Judgements

16-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary The Sutrapadha Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted accused Vijayabhai Masribhai Raja of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(A) for illegally possessing four liters of alcohol. The court found that while prosecution witnesses (panchas) were examined, they failed to corroborate the prosecution case, and the investigation procedure was compromised by lack of proper technical evidence (FSL report) and failure to establish direct connection of the prohibited articles with the accused. Applying the principle of "benefit of doubt" and relying on Supreme Court precedents, the court held the case not proven beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted the defendant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Sutrapadha Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted accused Vijayabhai Masribhai Raja of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(A) for illegally possessing four liters of alcohol. The court found that while prosecution witnesses (panchas) were examined, they failed to corroborate the prosecution case, and the investigation procedure was compromised by lack of proper technical evidence (FSL report) and failure to establish direct connection of the prohibited articles with the accused. Applying the principle of "benefit of doubt" and relying on Supreme Court precedents, the court held the case not proven beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted the defendant. 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