Govt. of Gujarat vs RAVINABEN W O RAKESHBHAI SOLANKI Advocate - V D KAMLIYA — 1193/2025

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

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJGS050016582025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1193/2025

Filing Date

09-12-2025

Registration No

1193/2025

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

987

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

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

RAVINABEN W O RAKESHBHAI SOLANKI 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 court acquitted the accused Ravinaabben of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(A), finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted critical evidential gaps: the panchas (witnesses) did not support the prosecution's case, proper procedure was not followed during seizure, and the link between the prohibited articles and the accused was not established. Applying precedents from Gujarat High Court judgments, the court granted the accused the benefit of doubt under criminal jurisprudence principles. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted the accused Ravinaabben of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(A), finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted critical evidential gaps: the panchas (witnesses) did not support the prosecution's case, proper procedure was not followed during seizure, and the link between the prohibited articles and the accused was not established. Applying precedents from Gujarat High Court judgments, the court granted the accused the benefit of doubt under criminal jurisprudence principles. 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