Government of Gujarat vs NAVAGHANBHAI NAGJIBHAI GELADIYA Advocate - H B DAVE — 617/2025

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AE,116B,81. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 06th March 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJSN040008692025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

617/2025

Filing Date

22-07-2025

Registration No

617/2025

Registration Date

22-07-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, SAYLA

Judge

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

Decision Date

06th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65AE,116B,81

Petitioner(s)

Government of Gujarat

Respondent(s)

NAVAGHANBHAI NAGJIBHAI GELADIYA Advocate - H B DAVE

MAHIPALNATH JESALNATH BLOCH

Adv. null

SOHILBHAI RAMJANBHAI MAMANI

Adv. null

SURAJBHAI DHIRUBHAI GELADIYA

Adv. null

KRUSNKUMARSINH SHIVARAJBHAI ZALA

Adv. null

Hearing History

Judge: 28-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

06-03-2026

Disposed

26-02-2026

JUDGEMENT

29-01-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

29-12-2025

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

27-11-2025

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

06-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Court Judgment Summary Case No. C.C. 617/2025 | Sayla First Class Magistrate Court Decision: The court acquitted all five accused persons under the Prohibition Act for lack of sufficient evidence. While liquor bottles and vehicles were allegedly seized from their possession, the court found critical procedural and evidentiary gaps—including inadequate panchnama (witness documentation), no independent witness corroboration, and failure to establish the accused's direct possession of the contraband goods from the sealed office space where they were allegedly found. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Judgment Summary Case No. C.C. 617/2025 | Sayla First Class Magistrate Court Decision: The court acquitted all five accused persons under the Prohibition Act for lack of sufficient evidence. While liquor bottles and vehicles were allegedly seized from their possession, the court found critical procedural and evidentiary gaps—including inadequate panchnama (witness documentation), no independent witness corroboration, and failure to establish the accused's direct possession of the contraband goods from the sealed office space where they were allegedly found. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, SAYLA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case