Government of Gujarat vs KULDEEPSINH JETHUBHA JADEJA Advocate - N H LALANI — 928/2025

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 01st April 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJJM040012052025

Filing Number

928/2025

Filing Date

07-Aug-2025

Registration No

928/2025

Registration Date

07-Aug-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, JAMJODHPUR

Judge

1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

01-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 12-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11202013250126

Police Station

SETHVADALA POLICE STATION - JAMNAGAR DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KULDEEPSINH JETHUBHA JADEJA Advocate - N H LALANI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 01-Apr-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary: Criminal Case 928/2025 Court Decision: The accused, Kuldeepsinh Jethubha Jadeja, was acquitted of charges under the Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that prohibited liquor recovered during a police raid on April 28, 2025, was in the accused's possession. Key Reasoning: While police witnesses testified to the recovery of eight bottles of country liquor valued at ₹800 during a raid near Vanana village, the court found critical evidentiary gaps. The independent witness (panch) testimony—crucial in Indian criminal procedure—did not corroborate the seizure details. The court noted the absence of FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory) report to confirm the liquid was illegal liquor, lack of independent witness statements in investigation records, and insufficient documentary evidence supporting the prosecution's case. The court emphasized that police evidence alone, without independent corroboration, could not sustain conviction in such cases. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 01-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 16-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 24-Feb-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 16-Feb-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  7. 05-Jan-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  8. 23-Dec-2025

    Final Arguments

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  9. 11-Nov-2025

    Further Statement

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  10. 06-Oct-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  11. 02-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  12. 07-Aug-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  13. 07-Aug-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 928/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Criminal Case 928/2025 Court Decision: The accused, Kuldeepsinh Jethubha Jadeja, was acquitted of charges under the Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that prohibited liquor recovered during a police raid on April 28, 2025, was in the accused's possession. Key Reasoning: While police witnesses testified to the recovery of eight bottles of country liquor valued at ₹800 during a raid near Vanana village, the court found critical evidentiary gaps. The independent witness (panch) testimony—crucial in Indian criminal procedure—did not corroborate the seizure details. The court noted the absence of FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory) report to confirm the liquid was illegal liquor, lack of independent witness statements in investigation records, and insufficient documentary evidence supporting the prosecution's case. The court emphasized that police evidence alone, without independent corroboration, could not sustain conviction in such cases. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case