Govt. of Gujarat vs ashokbhai kanabhai chohan Advocate - H M VAJA — 1214/2025

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

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJGS050016792025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1214/2025

Filing Date

10-12-2025

Registration No

1214/2025

Registration Date

10-12-2025

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

780

Police Station

SUTRAPADA POLICE STATION - GIR SOMNATH DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65(f)

Petitioner(s)

Govt. of Gujarat

Respondent(s)

ashokbhai kanabhai chohan Advocate - H M VAJA

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 acquitted accused Ashokbhai Kanabhai Chohaan of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(F), finding the prosecution failed to conclusively prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that despite seizure of illicit liquor, the prosecution's witnesses (panchas) did not adequately corroborate the evidence, and critical procedural gaps undermined the investigation's credibility, warranting the benefit of doubt to 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 acquitted accused Ashokbhai Kanabhai Chohaan of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(F), finding the prosecution failed to conclusively prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that despite seizure of illicit liquor, the prosecution's witnesses (panchas) did not adequately corroborate the evidence, and critical procedural gaps undermined the investigation's credibility, warranting the benefit of doubt to 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