Government of Gujarat vs VISHVARAJSINH SAHDEVSINH ZALA Advocate - K V SHUKLA — 34/2026
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(a)(a). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 06th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJSN020000472026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
34/2026
Filing Date
03-01-2026
Registration No
34/2026
Registration Date
03-01-2026
Court
CIVIL COURT SURENDRANAGAR
Judge
9-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
06th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
VISHVARAJSINH SAHDEVSINH ZALA Advocate - K V SHUKLA
Hearing History
Judge: 9-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 26-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 19-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 13-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 03-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary Case No. 34/2026 | Surendranagar First Class Judicial Magistrate Court The court acquitted defendant Vishvarajsinh Sahdevsinh Jhala of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(a)(a) for allegedly possessing 2 liters of indigenous liquor without a valid permit. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, particularly because the panchnama (seizure document) lacked credible corroboration—the panchs who allegedly witnessed the seizure provided no substantive details during testimony to support the allegations. The court noted the absence of independent witnesses, FSL reports on the seized substance, and inadequate evidence linking the accused to the prohibited item, thus granting benefit of doubt to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case No. 34/2026 | Surendranagar First Class Judicial Magistrate Court The court acquitted defendant Vishvarajsinh Sahdevsinh Jhala of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(a)(a) for allegedly possessing 2 liters of indigenous liquor without a valid permit. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, particularly because the panchnama (seizure document) lacked credible corroboration—the panchs who allegedly witnessed the seizure provided no substantive details during testimony to support the allegations. The court noted the absence of independent witnesses, FSL reports on the seized substance, and inadequate evidence linking the accused to the prohibited item, thus granting benefit of doubt to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts