Government of Gujarat vs Ushaben Kishojbhai Parmar Advocate - D M VAGHELA — 3061/2025

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 11th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJRJ050040132025

Filing Number

3061/2025

Filing Date

04-Dec-2025

Registration No

3061/2025

Registration Date

04-Dec-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

11213022250517

Police Station

JETPUR CITY POLICE STATION - RAJKOT DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Ushaben Kishojbhai Parmar Advocate - D M VAGHELA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Summary: The Jetpur Judicial Magistrate acquitted the accused under Section 65(A)(A) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act due to insufficient evidence. Although the prosecution alleged the accused possessed 2 liters of country liquor worth Rs. 400 for sale on 23/08/2025, the court found the prosecution failed to establish possession conclusively—no independent witness statement corroborated the seizure, no FSL certificate confirmed the liquor, and the recovery lacked proper documentation. The court ruled the benefit of doubt goes to the accused and ordered immediate release on existing bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 11-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 19-Feb-2026

    Further Statement

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 04-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 04-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 3061/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Jetpur Judicial Magistrate acquitted the accused under Section 65(A)(A) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act due to insufficient evidence. Although the prosecution alleged the accused possessed 2 liters of country liquor worth Rs. 400 for sale on 23/08/2025, the court found the prosecution failed to establish possession conclusively—no independent witness statement corroborated the seizure, no FSL certificate confirmed the liquor, and the recovery lacked proper documentation. The court ruled the benefit of doubt goes to the accused and ordered immediate release on existing bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case