Government of Gujarat vs Jyotiben Dhirubhai Zala Advocate - P C APARNATHI — 2541/2025
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 11th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJRJ050033172025
Filing Number
2541/2025
Filing Date
06-Oct-2025
Registration No
2541/2025
Registration Date
06-Oct-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, JETPUR
Judge
1-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
11-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 16-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11213022250600
Police Station
JETPUR CITY POLICE STATION - RAJKOT DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.Jyotiben Dhirubhai Zala Advocate - P C APARNATHI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
11-Mar-2026
JudegementView PDF
Summary The Jetpur First Class Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted the accused of charges under Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A) for allegedly possessing 5 liters of illicit liquor valued at Rs. 1,000 on 24/09/2025. The court found that the prosecution failed to conclusively prove possession, as no independent witness statement corroborated the seizure, no FSL certificate confirmed the substance was liquor, and the accused's body search was not documented. The court granted benefit of doubt to the accused due to insufficient evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
11-Mar-2026
Disposed
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
19-Feb-2026
Further Statement
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
18-Dec-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
06-Oct-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
06-Oct-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 2541/2025
Summary The Jetpur First Class Judicial Magistrate Court acquitted the accused of charges under Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A) for allegedly possessing 5 liters of illicit liquor valued at Rs. 1,000 on 24/09/2025. The court found that the prosecution failed to conclusively prove possession, as no independent witness statement corroborated the seizure, no FSL certificate confirmed the substance was liquor, and the accused's body search was not documented. The court granted benefit of doubt to the accused due to insufficient evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts