Govt. of Gujarat vs dhaniben w o bhaveshbhai vaghela Advocate - V D KAMLIYA — 1181/2025

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(a)(a). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 03rd April 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJGS050016462025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1181/2025

Filing Date

09-12-2025

Registration No

1181/2025

Registration Date

09-12-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, SUTRAPADA

Judge

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

Decision Date

03rd April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

958

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)

dhaniben w o bhaveshbhai vaghela Advocate - V D KAMLIYA

Hearing History

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

03-04-2026

Disposed

09-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

12-01-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

Final Orders / Judgements

03-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary The Sutrapad Judicial Magistrate First Class court acquitted the accused Dhaniben under Section 67(AA) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the panch witnesses did not corroborate the seizure of prohibited alcohol from the accused's possession, and insufficient evidence linked the contraband directly to the accused. Applying Supreme Court precedent emphasizing the benefit of doubt in criminal jurisprudence, the court ruled there was no prospect of conviction and discharged the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Sutrapad Judicial Magistrate First Class court acquitted the accused Dhaniben under Section 67(AA) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the panch witnesses did not corroborate the seizure of prohibited alcohol from the accused's possession, and insufficient evidence linked the contraband directly to the accused. Applying Supreme Court precedent emphasizing the benefit of doubt in criminal jurisprudence, the court ruled there was no prospect of conviction and discharged the accused. 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