GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT vs GAJENDRASINH URFE LALO MAHENDRASINH SINDHA Advocate - D M PRAJAPATI — 2603/2025
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 05th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJVD040037912025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
2603/2025
Filing Date
03-10-2025
Registration No
2603/2025
Registration Date
03-10-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, PADRA
Judge
4-3rd ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Decision Date
05th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
GAJENDRASINH URFE LALO MAHENDRASINH SINDHA Advocate - D M PRAJAPATI
Hearing History
Judge: 4-3rd ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
FURTHER STATEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 05-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 23-01-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 08-12-2025 | FURTHER STATEMENT | |
| 20-11-2025 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 03-10-2025 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The 3rd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Padra acquitted the accused under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(A)(A), finding insufficient evidence to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the prosecution's case relied heavily on unsubstantiated police statements without documentary or forensic corroboration, and the seizure of alleged contraband liquor lacked proper FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory) verification and ownership proof, warranting acquittal under the benefit of doubt principle. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The 3rd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Padra acquitted the accused under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(A)(A), finding insufficient evidence to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the prosecution's case relied heavily on unsubstantiated police statements without documentary or forensic corroboration, and the seizure of alleged contraband liquor lacked proper FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory) verification and ownership proof, warranting acquittal under the benefit of doubt principle. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts