GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT vs RANJNABEN PRABHATBHAI PUNJABHAI THAKOR Advocate - G K PARMAR — 2610/2025
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65F. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 05th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJVD040037982025
Filing Number
2610/2025
Filing Date
03-Oct-2025
Registration No
2610/2025
Registration Date
03-Oct-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, PADRA
Judge
4-3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
Decision Date
05-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 10-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.RANJNABEN PRABHATBHAI PUNJABHAI THAKOR Advocate - G K PARMAR
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
05-Mar-2026
Judegement
Court Decision Summary Case: Criminal Case No. 2610/2025, 3rd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Padra, Vadodara Decision: The court acquitted the accused under the Prohibition Act, Section 65(f), finding that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted critical evidentiary gaps: the seized liquor lacked FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory) testing confirmation, witness testimonies were inconsistent regarding the seizure vehicle details and timing, and the accused's alleged possession of the contraband was not conclusively proven through reliable documentary or physical evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
05-Mar-2026
Disposed
3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
23-Jan-2026
Judgement
3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
08-Dec-2025
Further Statement
3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
20-Nov-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.
-
03-Oct-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
03-Oct-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 2610/2025
Court Decision Summary Case: Criminal Case No. 2610/2025, 3rd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Padra, Vadodara Decision: The court acquitted the accused under the Prohibition Act, Section 65(f), finding that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted critical evidentiary gaps: the seized liquor lacked FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory) testing confirmation, witness testimonies were inconsistent regarding the seizure vehicle details and timing, and the accused's alleged possession of the contraband was not conclusively proven through reliable documentary or physical evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts