Government of Gujarat vs DINESH URFE DINO NATHABHAI PARMAR Advocate - M B MUCHHAR — 691/2025
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 15th April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJJN090009272025
Filing Number
691/2025
Filing Date
03-12-2025
Registration No
691/2025
Registration Date
03-12-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, MANAVADAR
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
15th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11203037250301
Police Station
MANAVADAR POLICE STATION - JUNAGADH DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
DINESH URFE DINO NATHABHAI PARMAR Advocate - M B MUCHHAR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 15-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 30-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 11-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 04-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 05-01-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court acquitted the accused Dinesh Ufed Dino Natha Bhai Parmar of charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Section 65(A) for illegal possession of country-made liquor. The court found that the panchnama (official record) prepared by police lacked independent witness signatures and proper documentation, and no neutral witnesses were called to verify the seized contraband, making the evidence unreliable. Consequently, the case against the accused was dismissed for lack of credible substantiation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court acquitted the accused Dinesh Ufed Dino Natha Bhai Parmar of charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Section 65(A) for illegal possession of country-made liquor. The court found that the panchnama (official record) prepared by police lacked independent witness signatures and proper documentation, and no neutral witnesses were called to verify the seized contraband, making the evidence unreliable. Consequently, the case against the accused was dismissed for lack of credible substantiation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts