THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs VANTIBEN W/O RAMDASBHAI MANSHUBHAI TUMBDA Advocate - S C BHOYE — 33/2026
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 27th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJNV110000332026
Filing Number
33/2026
Filing Date
07-Jan-2026
Registration No
33/2026
Registration Date
07-Jan-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, VAGHAI
Judge
1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
27-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 16-Apr-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11219007250545
Police Station
WAGHAI POLICE STATION - DANGS DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.VANTIBEN W/O RAMDASBHAI MANSHUBHAI TUMBDA Advocate - S C BHOYE
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
27-Mar-2026
JudegementView PDF
The court acquitted the accused (Vantiben Ramdas Tunbda) in an IMFL (Indian Made Foreign Liquor) prohibition case, finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that conviction cannot rest solely on police testimony without independent corroborating evidence, and the prosecution did not adequately prove the accused's possession or ownership of the seized liquor bottles. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
27-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
23-Mar-2026
Further Statement
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
09-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
05-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
11-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
08-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
07-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 33/2026
The court acquitted the accused (Vantiben Ramdas Tunbda) in an IMFL (Indian Made Foreign Liquor) prohibition case, finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that conviction cannot rest solely on police testimony without independent corroborating evidence, and the prosecution did not adequately prove the accused's possession or ownership of the seized liquor bottles. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts