Government of Gujarat vs RITESHKUMAR SANJAYRAM RAJVANSHI Advocate - B V SHAH — 10607/2025
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65E , 116B. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 16th March 2026.
CC RLY - CRIMINAL CASE - RAILWAY
CNR: GJSR160107412025
Filing Number
10613/2025
Filing Date
31-Dec-2025
Registration No
10607/2025
Registration Date
31-Dec-2025
Court
RAILWAY COURT, Surat
Judge
1-Judicial Magistrate First Class (Railways)
Decision Date
16-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 16-Apr-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11212062251404
Police Station
VAPI RAILWAY POLICE STATION - VALSAD DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Respondent(s)
-
1.RITESHKUMAR SANJAYRAM RAJVANSHI Advocate - B V SHAH
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
16-Mar-2026
JudegementView PDF
The Railway Court in Surat acquitted the accused Ritesh Kumar (charged under Gujarat Prohibition Act sections 65(I) and 116(B)) due to insufficient evidence, finding that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted critical evidentiary gaps including weak witness testimony from panchas (witnesses), lack of independent witnesses, and procedural irregularities that undermined the prosecution's credibility. Consequently, the accused was discharged and any seized contraband alcohol was ordered destroyed as per law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
16-Mar-2026
Disposed
Judicial Magistrate First Class (Railways)
-
09-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Judicial Magistrate First Class (Railways)
-
23-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Judicial Magistrate First Class (Railways)
-
02-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
31-Dec-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 10607/2025
The Railway Court in Surat acquitted the accused Ritesh Kumar (charged under Gujarat Prohibition Act sections 65(I) and 116(B)) due to insufficient evidence, finding that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted critical evidentiary gaps including weak witness testimony from panchas (witnesses), lack of independent witnesses, and procedural irregularities that undermined the prosecution's credibility. Consequently, the accused was discharged and any seized contraband alcohol was ordered destroyed as per law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts