Government of GUJARAT vs AKASH PRATAP VASAVE Advocate - R A VASAVA — 1487/2024

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(E),98(2),81,116(B). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 10th April 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJNR030017702024

Filing Number

1487/2024

Filing Date

31-Aug-2024

Registration No

1487/2024

Registration Date

31-Aug-2024

Court

TALUKA COURT, SAGBARA

Judge

1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

10-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 06-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11823021240565

Police Station

SAGBARA POLICE STATION- NARMADA DISTRICT

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(E),98(2),81,116(B)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of GUJARAT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.AKASH PRATAP VASAVE Advocate - R A VASAVA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Apr-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Summary The Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) court in Sagbara acquitted accused Akash Prakash Vasave of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 (Sections 65(A)(E), 98(2), 81, 116(B)) on grounds of insufficient evidence. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, noting that the seized contraband material lacked corroborating testimony from independent witnesses and that police evidence alone cannot constitute reliable proof without independent corroboration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 25-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 10-Mar-2026

    Further Statement

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 03-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  7. 06-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  8. 16-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  9. 02-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  10. 11-Nov-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  11. 07-Oct-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  12. 09-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  13. 19-Aug-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  14. 23-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  15. 18-Jun-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  16. 21-May-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  17. 30-Apr-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  18. 09-Apr-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  19. 26-Mar-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  20. 19-Mar-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  21. 05-Mar-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  22. 03-Mar-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  23. 13-Jan-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  24. 30-Nov-2024

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  25. 23-Oct-2024

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  26. 16-Oct-2024

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  27. 01-Oct-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  28. 31-Aug-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1487/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) court in Sagbara acquitted accused Akash Prakash Vasave of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 (Sections 65(A)(E), 98(2), 81, 116(B)) on grounds of insufficient evidence. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, noting that the seized contraband material lacked corroborating testimony from independent witnesses and that police evidence alone cannot constitute reliable proof without independent corroboration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case