SUBODH GUPTA S/O PURSHOTTAM SHARAN GUPTA vs UP State THROUGH D G C CIVIL MORADABAD Advocate - D G C CIVIL — 136/2021
Case under Food Safety and Standards Act Section 70. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 25th March 2026.
Regular Civil Appeal
CNR: UPMO010052562021
Filing Number
375/2021
Filing Date
16-Aug-2021
Registration No
136/2021
Registration Date
16-Aug-2021
Court
District and Session Judge
Judge
1-District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
Decision Date
25-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Last updated 10-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SUBODH GUPTA S/O PURSHOTTAM SHARAN GUPTA
Adv. SURESH PAL SINGH
Respondent(s)
-
1.UP State THROUGH D G C CIVIL MORADABAD Advocate - D G C CIVIL
-
2.FOOD SAFETY OFFICER THOURGH ADJUDICATING OFFICER
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
25-Mar-2026
JudgementView PDF
Case Summary: Subodh Gupta v. UP State (Civil Appeal 136/2021) The Food Safety Appellate Authority partially allowed the appeal, reducing the penalty imposed on food businessman Subodh Gupta from ₹2,70,000 to ₹2,00,000 under the Food Safety and Standards Act 2006. The trial court had convicted Gupta for selling misbranded wheat flour lacking mandatory batch number, packing date, and best-before date declarations in capital letters and green vegetable symbol—violations of packaging regulations. The appellate authority found the original order lacked proper consideration of Section 49 mitigating factors (financial hardship, violation repetition nature, and actual harm caused) required before imposing penalties under Section 52. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
25-Mar-2026
Disposed
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
17-Mar-2026
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
10-Mar-2026
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
26-Feb-2026
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
13-Feb-2026
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
06-Feb-2026
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
09-Jan-2026
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
31-Oct-2025
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
25-Aug-2025
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
26-May-2025
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
20-Mar-2025
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
04-Jan-2025
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
10-Oct-2024
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
02-Aug-2024
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
02-May-2024
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
29-Feb-2024
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
11-Jan-2024
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
09-Nov-2023
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
01-Sep-2023
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
01-Jul-2023
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
10-Apr-2023
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
01-Feb-2023
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
28-Nov-2022
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
06-Oct-2022
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
25-Jul-2022
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
26-Apr-2022
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
02-Mar-2022
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
28-Feb-2022
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
01-Jan-2022
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
22-Nov-2021
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
20-Nov-2021
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad
-
20-Sep-2021
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
16-Aug-2021
Case filed
Registration No. 136/2021
Case Summary: Subodh Gupta v. UP State (Civil Appeal 136/2021) The Food Safety Appellate Authority partially allowed the appeal, reducing the penalty imposed on food businessman Subodh Gupta from ₹2,70,000 to ₹2,00,000 under the Food Safety and Standards Act 2006. The trial court had convicted Gupta for selling misbranded wheat flour lacking mandatory batch number, packing date, and best-before date declarations in capital letters and green vegetable symbol—violations of packaging regulations. The appellate authority found the original order lacked proper consideration of Section 49 mitigating factors (financial hardship, violation repetition nature, and actual harm caused) required before imposing penalties under Section 52. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts