THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs SUNIL KHEMAJI TADVI Advocate - G N VASAVA — 1704/2025

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 10th April 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJNR030019222025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1704/2025

Filing Date

13-10-2025

Registration No

1704/2025

Registration Date

13-10-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, SAGBARA

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

10th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

11823021250453

Police Station

SAGBARA POLICE STATION- NARMADA DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65AA

Petitioner(s)

THE STATE OF GUJARAT

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

SUNIL KHEMAJI TADVI Advocate - G N VASAVA

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

10-04-2026

Disposed

25-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

10-03-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

03-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

06-01-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

10-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Case Summary The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sagbara acquitted accused Sunilbhai Khemjibhai Tadvi of charges under Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949, Section 65AA (liquor possession) due to insufficient corroborating evidence. The court found that while police recovered alleged contraband, the prosecution failed to establish the accused's knowing possession through independent witness testimony, as the panchnama (seizure record) witnesses provided no supporting evidence and no other credible witnesses linked the accused to the crime beyond police testimony alone. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sagbara acquitted accused Sunilbhai Khemjibhai Tadvi of charges under Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949, Section 65AA (liquor possession) due to insufficient corroborating evidence. The court found that while police recovered alleged contraband, the prosecution failed to establish the accused's knowing possession through independent witness testimony, as the panchnama (seizure record) witnesses provided no supporting evidence and no other credible witnesses linked the accused to the crime beyond police testimony alone. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, SAGBARA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case