Government of Gujarat vs Prakashbhai Dineshbhai Parghi Advocate - J K VYAS — 3075/2025

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA,116B. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 11th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJRJ050040292025

Filing Number

3075/2025

Filing Date

05-Dec-2025

Registration No

3075/2025

Registration Date

05-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

11213096250385

Police Station

JETPUR UDHYOG NAGAR POLICE STATION - RAJKOT DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA,116B

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Prakashbhai Dineshbhai Parghi Advocate - J K VYAS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    The court acquitted the defendant of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Sections 65(a)(a) and 116(b), finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The judgment emphasized that the independent witnesses (panchas) presented by the prosecution did not corroborate the case facts, and the seized English beer bottles could not be proven to be in the defendant's direct possession through conclusive evidence. 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. 05-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 05-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 3075/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The court acquitted the defendant of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Sections 65(a)(a) and 116(b), finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The judgment emphasized that the independent witnesses (panchas) presented by the prosecution did not corroborate the case facts, and the seized English beer bottles could not be proven to be in the defendant's direct possession through conclusive evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case