Government of Gujarat vs SALIMBHAI ABDULBHAI JUNEJA Advocate - S A DAL — 1046/2025
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 16th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJJM100013332025
Filing Number
1046/2025
Filing Date
30-12-2025
Registration No
1046/2025
Registration Date
30-12-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, DHROL
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11202014250329
Police Station
DHROL POLICE STATION - JAMNAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
SALIMBHAI ABDULBHAI JUNEJA Advocate - S A DAL
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 20-02-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 23-01-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
| 30-12-2025 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Criminal Case 1046/2025 Court Decision: The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Droll, acquitted defendant Salimbhai Abdulbhai Juneja of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the sole witness (Panch Punabhai Hemabhai Zapda) merely testified to signing the panchnama without providing substantive evidence linking the accused to the prohibited liquor allegedly recovered from his possession. Key Reasoning: The court noted critical evidentiary gaps: no independent witnesses were examined, the police witness testimony was not recorded, and the panch witness could not corroborate the prosecution's narrative. Applying established criminal jurisprudence principles, the court held that the quality and credibility of evidence matter more than witness count, and the prosecution's failure to present convincing evidence rendered the charge unsustainable. The accused was acquitted and ordered to furnish bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Criminal Case 1046/2025 Court Decision: The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Droll, acquitted defendant Salimbhai Abdulbhai Juneja of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A). The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the sole witness (Panch Punabhai Hemabhai Zapda) merely testified to signing the panchnama without providing substantive evidence linking the accused to the prohibited liquor allegedly recovered from his possession. Key Reasoning: The court noted critical evidentiary gaps: no independent witnesses were examined, the police witness testimony was not recorded, and the panch witness could not corroborate the prosecution's narrative. Applying established criminal jurisprudence principles, the court held that the quality and credibility of evidence matter more than witness count, and the prosecution's failure to present convincing evidence rendered the charge unsustainable. The accused was acquitted and ordered to furnish bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts