Govt. of Gujarat vs ravibhai karashnbhai vaja Advocate - V D KAMLIYA — 1187/2025
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(a)(a). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 03rd April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJGS050016522025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1187/2025
Filing Date
09-12-2025
Registration No
1187/2025
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
784
Police Station
SUTRAPADA POLICE STATION - GIR SOMNATH DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Govt. of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
ravibhai karashnbhai vaja Advocate - V D KAMLIYA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 03-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 12-01-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Sutrapur Judicial Magistrate First Class acquitted the accused, Ravibhai Karshnbhai Waja, of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(A), citing insufficient evidence and lack of corroboration from the mandatory witnesses (panchas). The court found that the prosecution failed to establish a convincing case linking the prohibited alcohol to the accused's possession, as the panch witnesses did not support the seizure procedure, and technical evidence was absent. Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the court gave the accused the benefit of doubt under criminal jurisprudence principles and acquitted him accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Sutrapur Judicial Magistrate First Class acquitted the accused, Ravibhai Karshnbhai Waja, of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(A), citing insufficient evidence and lack of corroboration from the mandatory witnesses (panchas). The court found that the prosecution failed to establish a convincing case linking the prohibited alcohol to the accused's possession, as the panch witnesses did not support the seizure procedure, and technical evidence was absent. Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the court gave the accused the benefit of doubt under criminal jurisprudence principles and acquitted him accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts