THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs HARSHADBA BALDEVSINH JADEJA Advocate - P R KOYANI — 528/2025

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

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJRJ080006682025

Case disposed

Filing Number

528/2025

Filing Date

19-12-2025

Registration No

528/2025

Registration Date

19-12-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, JAMKANDORNA

Judge

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

Decision Date

11th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

11213020250540

Police Station

JAMKANDORANA POLICE STATION - RAJKOT DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA

Petitioner(s)

THE STATE OF GUJARAT

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

HARSHADBA BALDEVSINH JADEJA Advocate - P R KOYANI

Hearing History

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

11-03-2026

Disposed

27-02-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

26-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

13-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

29-01-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

11-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

The court acquitted the accused Harshendra Baldevsingh Jadeja on charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(a)(a), finding that the investigation procedure was tainted and the prosecution failed to present credible evidence, particularly the panch witnesses did not support the case. The court held that without proper documentary evidence, FSL reports, and corroboration from independent witnesses, no conviction could be recorded, and ordered the accused's release with bail conditions per IPC Section 437 and CrPC Section 481. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court acquitted the accused Harshendra Baldevsingh Jadeja on charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(a)(a), finding that the investigation procedure was tainted and the prosecution failed to present credible evidence, particularly the panch witnesses did not support the case. The court held that without proper documentary evidence, FSL reports, and corroboration from independent witnesses, no conviction could be recorded, and ordered the accused's release with bail conditions per IPC Section 437 and CrPC Section 481. 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