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

Case disposed

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

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65AA

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.

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

05-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

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.

casestatus.in Summary

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

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, PADRA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case