THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs MANISHABEN SURESHBHAI PARMAR Advocate - R A SOJITRA — 530/2025
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 23rd March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJRJ080006702025
Filing Number
530/2025
Filing Date
19-Dec-2025
Registration No
530/2025
Registration Date
19-Dec-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, JAMKANDORNA
Judge
1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
23-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 16-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11213020250546
Police Station
JAMKANDORANA POLICE STATION - RAJKOT DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.MANISHABEN SURESHBHAI PARMAR Advocate - R A SOJITRA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
23-Mar-2026
Judegement
Summary The court acquitted the accused of charges under Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(a)(a), finding the investigation procedure tainted and the prosecution evidence lacking credibility. The court held that since independent witnesses (panchas) did not support the prosecution case and critical procedural safeguards were violated, no conviction could be sustained, thereby accepting the acquittal ordered by the trial court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
23-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
11-Mar-2026
Further Statement
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
27-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
13-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
29-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
06-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
01-Jan-2026
Framing Of Charge/Plea
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
19-Dec-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
19-Dec-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 530/2025
Summary The court acquitted the accused of charges under Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(a)(a), finding the investigation procedure tainted and the prosecution evidence lacking credibility. The court held that since independent witnesses (panchas) did not support the prosecution case and critical procedural safeguards were violated, no conviction could be sustained, thereby accepting the acquittal ordered by the trial court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts