Government of Gujarat vs MANOJBHAI SHANKARBHAI PAGI — 193/2026
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65aa,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 07th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJLV020003032026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
193/2026
Filing Date
23-02-2026
Registration No
193/2026
Registration Date
23-02-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, LUNAWADA
Judge
4-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
07th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
MANOJBHAI SHANKARBHAI PAGI
Hearing History
Judge: 4-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 07-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 05-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 02-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 23-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The court acquitted the accused of charges under Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65 for illegal possession of liquor (country-made alcohol, LI-03, 600ml bottle) without proper permission. The court found insufficient and contradictory evidence from the five panch witnesses—all police employees—whose testimonies were unreliable and failed to meet legal standards for corroboration, as the panch members denied knowledge of the proceedings and the investigating officer provided no credible documentary evidence supporting the alleged recovery. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The court acquitted the accused of charges under Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65 for illegal possession of liquor (country-made alcohol, LI-03, 600ml bottle) without proper permission. The court found insufficient and contradictory evidence from the five panch witnesses—all police employees—whose testimonies were unreliable and failed to meet legal standards for corroboration, as the panch members denied knowledge of the proceedings and the investigating officer provided no credible documentary evidence supporting the alleged recovery. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts