Government of Gujarat vs BHAVANABEN W/O SHAILESHBHAI RAMJIBHAI DEDANIYA (CHU.KOLI) Advocate - K A DANGAR — 646/2026
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(a)(a). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 09th April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJSN020008972026
Filing Number
646/2026
Filing Date
17-Feb-2026
Registration No
646/2026
Registration Date
17-Feb-2026
Court
CIVIL COURT SURENDRANAGAR
Judge
9-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
09-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 16-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
6250958
Police Station
SURENDRANAGAR CITY B DIVISION POLICE STATION - SURENDRANAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.BHAVANABEN W/O SHAILESHBHAI RAMJIBHAI DEDANIYA (CHU.KOLI) Advocate - K A DANGAR
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
09-Apr-2026
Judegement
Case 646/2026 - Summary Court Decision: The court acquitted the accused, Bhavanaben W/O Shaileshbhai Ramjibhai Dedaniya, of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A) for illegal possession of 0.5 liters of country liquor valued at Rs. 1000. The prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, as the panchnama (seizure document) was not adequately corroborated by witness testimony and key evidentiary gaps remained, particularly the absence of independent witnesses and FSL reports confirming the substance was alcohol. Applying the principle that benefit of doubt must go to the accused, the court granted acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
09-Apr-2026
Disposed
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
02-Apr-2026
Final Arguments
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
17-Mar-2026
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
07-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
17-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 646/2026
Case 646/2026 - Summary Court Decision: The court acquitted the accused, Bhavanaben W/O Shaileshbhai Ramjibhai Dedaniya, of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A) for illegal possession of 0.5 liters of country liquor valued at Rs. 1000. The prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, as the panchnama (seizure document) was not adequately corroborated by witness testimony and key evidentiary gaps remained, particularly the absence of independent witnesses and FSL reports confirming the substance was alcohol. Applying the principle that benefit of doubt must go to the accused, the court granted acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts