Government of Gujarat vs Bhimsingbhai Gopubhai Mavchi Advocate - R N GAMIT — 82/2026
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(a)(a). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 03rd April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJTP050000982026
e-Filing Number
28-01-2026
Filing Number
82/2026
Filing Date
04-02-2026
Registration No
82/2026
Registration Date
04-02-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, UCHCHHAL
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
03rd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11824006251064
Police Station
UCHCHHAL POLICE STATION - TAPI DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Respondent(s)
Bhimsingbhai Gopubhai Mavchi Advocate - R N GAMIT
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 03-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 24-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 17-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 09-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 06-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court acquitted the accused Bhimsingh Gopubhai Mavchi of charges under the Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A) for alleged illegal liquor possession. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, primarily because the panchnama (official seizure record) lacked independent corroboration, the FSL certificate on seized materials was not produced, and the case relied solely on police testimony without credible independent witnesses. Citing Gujarat High Court precedents, the court ruled that conviction cannot be based solely on interested police witnesses and that the prosecution must meet the requisite evidentiary standards. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court acquitted the accused Bhimsingh Gopubhai Mavchi of charges under the Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A) for alleged illegal liquor possession. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, primarily because the panchnama (official seizure record) lacked independent corroboration, the FSL certificate on seized materials was not produced, and the case relied solely on police testimony without credible independent witnesses. Citing Gujarat High Court precedents, the court ruled that conviction cannot be based solely on interested police witnesses and that the prosecution must meet the requisite evidentiary standards. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts