Government Of Gujarat vs Kamleshbhai Ashwinbhai Tadavi Advocate - M K TADVI — 209/2026

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA,98-2. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 17th April 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJNR050002152026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

209/2026

Filing Date

20-01-2026

Registration No

209/2026

Registration Date

20-01-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, TILAKWADA

Judge

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

Decision Date

17th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGEMENT

FIR Details

FIR Number

11823025251081

Police Station

TILAKWADA POLICE STATION- NARMADA DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65AA,98-2

Petitioner(s)

Government Of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

Kamleshbhai Ashwinbhai Tadavi Advocate - M K TADVI

Hearing History

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

17-04-2026

Disposed

27-03-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

10-03-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

19-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

20-01-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

Final Orders / Judgements

17-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary The Tilakwada First Class Magistrate Court acquitted the accused Kamleshbhai Ashwinbhai Tadvai of charges under the Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A)98(2) for allegedly possessing and transporting illegal whiskey. The court found insufficient evidence to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, noting that prosecution witnesses (panchas) failed to corroborate the FIR, no independent corroborating witnesses were examined, no FSL report was submitted, and critical details like panchas' names and vehicle information were missing from the FIR, warranting acquittal with benefit of doubt to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Tilakwada First Class Magistrate Court acquitted the accused Kamleshbhai Ashwinbhai Tadvai of charges under the Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A)98(2) for allegedly possessing and transporting illegal whiskey. The court found insufficient evidence to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, noting that prosecution witnesses (panchas) failed to corroborate the FIR, no independent corroborating witnesses were examined, no FSL report was submitted, and critical details like panchas' names and vehicle information were missing from the FIR, warranting acquittal with benefit of doubt to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, TILAKWADA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case