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
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
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
Disposed
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 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
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.
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
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts