Government of Gujarat vs KUVARBEN W/O CHANDUBHAI BHIKHABHAI JAKHANIYA Advocate - N B CHAVDA — 1071/2025
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 16th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJJM100013582025
Filing Number
1071/2025
Filing Date
31-12-2025
Registration No
1071/2025
Registration Date
31-12-2025
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
11202014250446
Police Station
DHROL POLICE STATION - JAMNAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
KUVARBEN W/O CHANDUBHAI BHIKHABHAI JAKHANIYA Advocate - N B CHAVDA
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 |
| 31-01-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
| 31-12-2025 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Criminal Case 1071/2025 Court Decision: The accused, Kuvarben W/O Chandubhai Bhikhabhai Jakhaniya, was acquitted of charges under Section 65(A)(A) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act for illegal possession of 4 liters of liquor valued at ₹800 without proper permit on June 10, 2025. Key Reasoning: The court found that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. The sole witness (panchnama witness) merely confirmed signing the document but provided no substantive support for the prosecution's allegations. Additionally, the police informant's testimony was not recorded, and without independent corroborating evidence, the court could not definitively prove that the seized material was prohibited under the Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Criminal Case 1071/2025 Court Decision: The accused, Kuvarben W/O Chandubhai Bhikhabhai Jakhaniya, was acquitted of charges under Section 65(A)(A) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act for illegal possession of 4 liters of liquor valued at ₹800 without proper permit on June 10, 2025. Key Reasoning: The court found that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. The sole witness (panchnama witness) merely confirmed signing the document but provided no substantive support for the prosecution's allegations. Additionally, the police informant's testimony was not recorded, and without independent corroborating evidence, the court could not definitively prove that the seized material was prohibited under the Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts