Government of Gujarat vs ranjankumar kuldipbhai sarma Advocate - CRPC- — 749/2021

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65 aa,81. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OF on 10th April 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJSR080007612021

Filing Number

756/2021

Filing Date

11-Jan-2021

Registration No

749/2021

Registration Date

11-Jan-2021

Court

TALUKA COURT, MAHUVA

Judge

1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

10-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 16-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11214031200025

Police Station

MAHUVA POLICE STATION - SURAT DISTRICT

Year

2020

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65 aa,81

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.ranjankumar kuldipbhai sarma Advocate - CRPC-

  2. 2.montikumar sunilbhai rajput

    Adv. CRPC-299

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Apr-2026

    Order

    Case Summary The court acquitted both accused (Ranjankumar Kuldipbhai Sharma and Montikumar Sunilbhai Rajput) under Section 239 of the CrPC, finding insufficient evidence to prove the charges of possession of foreign liquor and an unregistered motorcycle (under Prohibition Act Sections 65AA and 81). The court held that witness testimony contradicted the FIR narrative, no independent witnesses confirmed the seizure, and the prosecution failed to establish a direct link between the accused and the alleged contraband, making conviction impossible despite the seizure. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 09-Apr-2026

    Judgement

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 23-Mar-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 09-Mar-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  7. 09-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  8. 22-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  9. 13-Oct-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  10. 18-Aug-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  11. 21-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  12. 07-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  13. 28-Apr-2025

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  14. 10-Mar-2025

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  15. 10-Feb-2025

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  16. 20-Jan-2025

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  17. 30-Dec-2024

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  18. 25-Nov-2024

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  19. 07-Oct-2024

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  20. 02-Sep-2024

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  21. 22-Jul-2024

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  22. 24-Jun-2024

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  23. 06-May-2024

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  24. 08-Apr-2024

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  25. 26-Feb-2024

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  26. 22-Jan-2024

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  27. 18-Dec-2023

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  28. 20-Nov-2023

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  29. 09-Oct-2023

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  30. 11-Sep-2023

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  31. 21-Aug-2023

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  32. 17-Jul-2023

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  33. 26-Jun-2023

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  34. 05-Jun-2023

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  35. 29-May-2023

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  36. 11-Apr-2023

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  37. 30-Jan-2023

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  38. 19-Dec-2022

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  39. 01-Nov-2022

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  40. 15-Sep-2022

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  41. 10-Aug-2022

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  42. 18-Jul-2022

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  43. 29-Jun-2022

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  44. 18-Jun-2022

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  45. 06-Jun-2022

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  46. 04-May-2022

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  47. 31-Mar-2022

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  48. 02-Feb-2022

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  49. 14-Dec-2021

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  50. 15-Nov-2021

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  51. 07-Sep-2021

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  52. 13-Jul-2021

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  53. 19-Apr-2021

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  54. 11-Jan-2021

    Case filed

    Registration No. 749/2021

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The court acquitted both accused (Ranjankumar Kuldipbhai Sharma and Montikumar Sunilbhai Rajput) under Section 239 of the CrPC, finding insufficient evidence to prove the charges of possession of foreign liquor and an unregistered motorcycle (under Prohibition Act Sections 65AA and 81). The court held that witness testimony contradicted the FIR narrative, no independent witnesses confirmed the seizure, and the prosecution failed to establish a direct link between the accused and the alleged contraband, making conviction impossible despite the seizure. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case