Government of Gujarat vs nalin bhupatbhai dabhi Advocate - A R BAMBHAVA — 66/2026
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(a)(a). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 24th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJRJ100000892026
e-Filing Number
30-12-2025
Filing Number
66/2026
Filing Date
12-Jan-2026
Registration No
66/2026
Registration Date
12-Jan-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, PADDHARI
Judge
1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
24-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 16-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11213042250687
Police Station
PADDHARI POLICE STATION - RAJKOT DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.nalin bhupatbhai dabhi Advocate - A R BAMBHAVA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
24-Mar-2026
JudegementView PDF
Court Judgment Summary Case: CC No. 66-2026, Padhardi Court, Gujarat Decision: The court acquitted defendant Nalinbhai (also known as Yogeshbhai) of charges under the Prohibition Act, Section 65(A)(A), finding the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted the prosecution relied solely on police witness testimony without independent corroboration, and failed to establish the defendant's conscious possession of the alleged contraband liquor. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
24-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
13-Mar-2026
Judgement
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
11-Mar-2026
Final Arguments
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
20-Feb-2026
Further Statement
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
06-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
12-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
12-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 66/2026
Court Judgment Summary Case: CC No. 66-2026, Padhardi Court, Gujarat Decision: The court acquitted defendant Nalinbhai (also known as Yogeshbhai) of charges under the Prohibition Act, Section 65(A)(A), finding the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted the prosecution relied solely on police witness testimony without independent corroboration, and failed to establish the defendant's conscious possession of the alleged contraband liquor. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts