Government of Gujarat vs Ajaybhai Ramsingbhai Tadvi Advocate - A A DAYMA — 366/2026

Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 185,3,181,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 27th April 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJNR060003932026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

366/2026

Filing Date

10-03-2026

Registration No

366/2026

Registration Date

10-03-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, GARUDESHWAR

Judge

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

Decision Date

27th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

11823027250114

Police Station

KEVADIA TRAFFIC POLICE STATION - NARMADA DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 Section 185,3,181,
GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 66(1)B

Petitioner(s)

Government of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

Ajaybhai Ramsingbhai Tadvi Advocate - A A DAYMA

Hearing History

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

27-04-2026

Disposed

09-04-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

24-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

10-03-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

Final Orders / Judgements

27-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Court Decision Summary Case: Criminal Case No. 366/2026, Judicial Magistrate First Class Court, Garudeshwar, Narmada District Decision: The court acquitted the accused (Ajaybhai Ramsinghbhai Tadvi) of charges under Prohibition Act Section 66(1)(b) and IPC Sections 185, 3, 181, finding insufficient evidence of drunk driving. The prosecution failed to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt, as independent witness testimony did not corroborate key allegations, and required medical/forensic reports were not properly submitted. The accused is granted bail of Rs. 15,000. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary Case: Criminal Case No. 366/2026, Judicial Magistrate First Class Court, Garudeshwar, Narmada District Decision: The court acquitted the accused (Ajaybhai Ramsinghbhai Tadvi) of charges under Prohibition Act Section 66(1)(b) and IPC Sections 185, 3, 181, finding insufficient evidence of drunk driving. The prosecution failed to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt, as independent witness testimony did not corroborate key allegations, and required medical/forensic reports were not properly submitted. The accused is granted bail of Rs. 15,000. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, GARUDESHWAR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case