THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs JINABEN W/O RAMESHBHAI JAYSINGBHAI VASAVA Advocate - G N VASAVA — 1723/2025

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

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJNR030019412025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1723/2025

Filing Date

14-10-2025

Registration No

1723/2025

Registration Date

14-10-2025

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

11823021250863

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)

JINABEN W/O RAMESHBHAI JAYSINGBHAI VASAVA 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

Summary The JMFC Sagbara court acquitted accused Zinaaben Rameshbhai Vasava of charges under Section 65AA of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, for allegedly possessing 3 liters of illegal liquor worth ₹600. The court found that while the prosecution presented police evidence, it lacked independent corroborating witnesses and credible evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused knowingly possessed the contraband, thereby granting her the benefit of doubt under criminal jurisprudence principles. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The JMFC Sagbara court acquitted accused Zinaaben Rameshbhai Vasava of charges under Section 65AA of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, for allegedly possessing 3 liters of illegal liquor worth ₹600. The court found that while the prosecution presented police evidence, it lacked independent corroborating witnesses and credible evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused knowingly possessed the contraband, thereby granting her the benefit of doubt under criminal jurisprudence principles. 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