THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs CHETANBHAI GANGAJIBHAI VINJUDA Advocate - P R KOYANI — 17/2026

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 20th April 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJRJ080000512026

Case disposed

Filing Number

17/2026

Filing Date

12-02-2026

Registration No

17/2026

Registration Date

12-02-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, JAMKANDORNA

Judge

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

Decision Date

20th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

11213020250522

Police Station

JAMKANDORANA POLICE STATION - RAJKOT DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A)

Petitioner(s)

THE STATE OF GUJARAT

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

CHETANBHAI GANGAJIBHAI VINJUDA Advocate - P R KOYANI

Hearing History

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

20-04-2026

Disposed

18-04-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

23-03-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

11-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

26-02-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

Final Orders / Judgements

20-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Court Decision Summary The Judicial Magistrate First Class court acquitted the accused under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A) for illegal possession and sale of country liquor. The court found that the investigation procedure was tainted—the panch witnesses did not corroborate the prosecution's case, proper seizure procedures were not followed, and critical evidentiary standards under the Indian Evidence Act were not met, rendering the conviction unjustifiable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Judicial Magistrate First Class court acquitted the accused under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A) for illegal possession and sale of country liquor. The court found that the investigation procedure was tainted—the panch witnesses did not corroborate the prosecution's case, proper seizure procedures were not followed, and critical evidentiary standards under the Indian Evidence Act were not met, rendering the conviction unjustifiable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, JAMKANDORNA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case