Govt. of Gujarat vs bhavanaben w manasingbhai ebhabhai paramar Advocate - K J VADHER — 1178/2025
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(a)(a). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 03rd April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJGS050016432025
Filing Number
1178/2025
Filing Date
08-Dec-2025
Registration No
1178/2025
Registration Date
08-Dec-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, SUTRAPADA
Judge
1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
03-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 23-Apr-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
938
Police Station
SUTRAPADA POLICE STATION - GIR SOMNATH DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Govt. of Gujarat
Respondent(s)
-
1.bhavanaben w manasingbhai ebhabhai paramar Advocate - K J VADHER
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
03-Apr-2026
Judegement
Court Decision Summary The Sutrapad First Class Judicial Magistrate's Court acquitted the accused, Bhavnaben (wife of Mansinhbhai Parmaar), of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(A) for allegedly possessing unauthorized alcohol. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt due to insufficient witness corroboration, lack of technical expert evidence (FSL), absence of proper seizure documentation, and questionable investigation procedures that appeared procedurally tainted. Applying the principle of benefit of doubt, the accused was declared not guilty and released. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
03-Apr-2026
Disposed
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
09-Mar-2026
Judgement
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
12-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
08-Dec-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 1178/2025
Court Decision Summary The Sutrapad First Class Judicial Magistrate's Court acquitted the accused, Bhavnaben (wife of Mansinhbhai Parmaar), of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(A) for allegedly possessing unauthorized alcohol. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt due to insufficient witness corroboration, lack of technical expert evidence (FSL), absence of proper seizure documentation, and questionable investigation procedures that appeared procedurally tainted. Applying the principle of benefit of doubt, the accused was declared not guilty and released. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts