The State of Gujarat vs JESINGBHAI KESHARBHAI MORI Advocate - N M JADAV — 185/2025

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65F. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 25th March 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJGS060002342025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

185/2025

Filing Date

22-01-2025

Registration No

185/2025

Registration Date

22-01-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, KODINAR

Judge

4-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

Decision Date

25th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGEMENT

FIR Details

FIR Number

11186002241942

Police Station

KODINAR POLICE STATION - GIR SOMNATH DISTRICT

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65F

Petitioner(s)

The State of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

JESINGBHAI KESHARBHAI MORI Advocate - N M JADAV

Hearing History

Judge: 4-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

25-03-2026

Disposed

09-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

07-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

24-12-2025

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

04-11-2025

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

25-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Court Decision Summary The Kodinar Magistrate Court acquitted the accused under Section 65 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, finding the prosecution failed to prove the charge of illegally possessing and manufacturing illicit liquor (approximately 160 liters valued at ₹41,600). The court ruled that the prosecution's evidence was insufficient—key witnesses did not provide corroborating testimony, the seizure procedure was inadequately documented, and independent witnesses were not examined, making it impossible to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Kodinar Magistrate Court acquitted the accused under Section 65 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, finding the prosecution failed to prove the charge of illegally possessing and manufacturing illicit liquor (approximately 160 liters valued at ₹41,600). The court ruled that the prosecution's evidence was insufficient—key witnesses did not provide corroborating testimony, the seizure procedure was inadequately documented, and independent witnesses were not examined, making it impossible to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, KODINAR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case