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

Case disposed

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

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65AA

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

16-03-2026

Disposed

20-02-2026

JUDGEMENT

23-01-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

30-12-2025

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

Final Orders / Judgements

16-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

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.

casestatus.in Summary

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

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, DHROL All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case