Government of Gujarat vs JAKHSIBHAI CHHAGANBHAI JAKHANIYA Advocate - A P LALKIYA — 1182/2025

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 28th April 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJJM040014702025

Case disposed

Filing Number

1182/2025

Filing Date

30-08-2025

Registration No

1182/2025

Registration Date

30-08-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, JAMJODHPUR

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

28th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

11202013250215

Police Station

SETHVADALA POLICE STATION - JAMNAGAR DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65AA

Petitioner(s)

Government of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

JAKHSIBHAI CHHAGANBHAI JAKHANIYA Advocate - A P LALKIYA

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

28-04-2026

Disposed

16-03-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

02-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

13-01-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

09-12-2025

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

28-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Case Summary: 1182/2025 Court Decision: The accused, Jakhsibhai Chhaganbhai Jakhaniya, was acquitted of charges under the Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A) due to insufficient evidence. While police testimony corroborated the recovery of 4 liters of illicit liquor from the accused's residence on July 15, 2025, the prosecution failed to establish this through independent corroborating witnesses—the panchs (independent observers) provided no substantive testimony beyond confirming their signatures on the panchnama (seizure document). The court found that without independent verification supporting the recovery claim, the factual allegations could not be proven beyond reasonable doubt, and therefore acquitted the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 1182/2025 Court Decision: The accused, Jakhsibhai Chhaganbhai Jakhaniya, was acquitted of charges under the Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A) due to insufficient evidence. While police testimony corroborated the recovery of 4 liters of illicit liquor from the accused's residence on July 15, 2025, the prosecution failed to establish this through independent corroborating witnesses—the panchs (independent observers) provided no substantive testimony beyond confirming their signatures on the panchnama (seizure document). The court found that without independent verification supporting the recovery claim, the factual allegations could not be proven beyond reasonable doubt, and therefore acquitted 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, JAMJODHPUR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case