GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT vs JASHVANTBHAI KHUMANSINH PADHIYAR Advocate - M N BELIM — 2780/2025

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 05th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJVD040040052025

Filing Number

2780/2025

Filing Date

17-Oct-2025

Registration No

2780/2025

Registration Date

17-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

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.JASHVANTBHAI KHUMANSINH PADHIYAR Advocate - M N BELIM

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary The 3rd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Padra acquitted the accused under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(A)(A) due to insufficient evidence. The court found critical gaps in the prosecution's case: the seizure memo lacked independent corroboration, the investigating officer's testimony was uncorroborated, and no FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory) report was produced to confirm the seized substance was genuine liquor. Given these deficiencies and the benefit of doubt principle, the accused was acquitted and ordered released on bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  4. 06-Feb-2026

    Judgement

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  5. 12-Jan-2026

    Further Statement

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  6. 04-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  7. 17-Oct-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 17-Oct-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 2780/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The 3rd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Padra acquitted the accused under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(A)(A) due to insufficient evidence. The court found critical gaps in the prosecution's case: the seizure memo lacked independent corroboration, the investigating officer's testimony was uncorroborated, and no FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory) report was produced to confirm the seized substance was genuine liquor. Given these deficiencies and the benefit of doubt principle, the accused was acquitted and ordered released on bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case