Government of Gujarat vs ANOPSINH MALARSINH JADEJA Advocate - H M MAHESHWARI — 3714/2024

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A). Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 06th July 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJKT020060632024

Filing Number

3714/2024

Filing Date

05-Aug-2024

Registration No

3714/2024

Registration Date

05-Aug-2024

Court

CIVIL COURT BHUJ

Judge

1-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

Decision Date

06-Jul-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGEMENT

Last updated 18-Jul-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11205039240179

Police Station

BHUJ TALUKA POLICE STATION - KACHCHH DISTRICT

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.ANOPSINH MALARSINH JADEJA Advocate - H M MAHESHWARI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-Jul-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Case Summary: CC No. 3714/2024 Court Decision: The accused Anopsinh Malarsinh Jadeja was acquitted under the Gujarat Prohibition Act 2016, Section 65(A)(A). The court found the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused possessed 4 liters of illicit liquor worth ₹80 on the alleged date. Key Reasoning: The court emphasized that the panch witness (independent witness) could not corroborate the seizure proceedings, and the accused's actual possession of the contraband material could not be conclusively established. Without independent corroborating evidence and relying solely on police testimony, conviction could not be upheld under Supreme Court precedent standards for seizure validity. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-Jul-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  4. 01-Jul-2026

    Further Statement

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  5. 24-Jun-2026

    Further Statement

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  6. 19-Jun-2026

    Further Statement

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  7. 05-Jun-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  8. 26-May-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  9. 21-Apr-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  10. 16-Mar-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  11. 11-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  12. 03-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  13. 08-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  14. 09-Jun-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  15. 21-Apr-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge and A.C.J.M.

  16. 10-Mar-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge and A.C.J.M.

  17. 27-Jan-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge and A.C.J.M.

  18. 30-Dec-2024

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge and A.C.J.M.

  19. 11-Nov-2024

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge and A.C.J.M.

  20. 05-Sep-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  21. 05-Aug-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 3714/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CC No. 3714/2024 Court Decision: The accused Anopsinh Malarsinh Jadeja was acquitted under the Gujarat Prohibition Act 2016, Section 65(A)(A). The court found the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused possessed 4 liters of illicit liquor worth ₹80 on the alleged date. Key Reasoning: The court emphasized that the panch witness (independent witness) could not corroborate the seizure proceedings, and the accused's actual possession of the contraband material could not be conclusively established. Without independent corroborating evidence and relying solely on police testimony, conviction could not be upheld under Supreme Court precedent standards for seizure validity. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case