Sri Anand Kotreshwar Sithale Vs the Enforcement Officer — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sri Anand Kotreshwar Sithale Vs the Enforcement Officer — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal dismissed as not maintainable; liberty reserved to the appellant to take necessary legal steps questioning the judgment passed by the First Appellate Court in accordance with law; appellant permitted to avail the benefit of Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act; office directed to return the copy of the judgment to the appellant.

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal appeal under Section 374(2) CrPC (Section 415(2) BNSS) against the judgment of conviction and sentence in C.C.No.105/2024, which has already been confirmed by the First Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.1700/2024, is maintainable before the High Court of Karnataka.

Court's answer

The criminal appeal is not maintainable before this Court because the judgment of conviction and sentence in C.C.No.105/2024 dated 26.09.2024 was already confirmed by the First Appellate Court (LXIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-70)) in Crl.A.No.1700/2024 dated 22.11.2025; accordingly the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable.

Ratio / Principle

With the appeal dismissed as not maintainable, liberty is reserved to the appellant to take necessary legal steps questioning the judgment passed by the First Appellate Court in accordance with law, and the appellant is permitted to avail the benefit of the provision of Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal appeal under S.374(2) CrPC (S.415(2) BNSS) by the former Director convicted in C.C.No.105/2024 (Special Court for Economic Offences, Bengaluru, 26.09.2024) held not maintainable before the High Court of Karnataka, since the conviction had already been confirmed by the First Appellate Court (LXIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-70)) in Crl.A.No.1700/2024 on 22.11.2025. Appeal dismissed as not maintainable, with liberty reserved to the appellant to question the First Appellate Court's judgment in accordance with law, permission to avail the benefit of Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act, and direction to the office to return the copy of the judgment.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1798 CRL.A No. 2618 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2618 OF 2025 (C)

BETWEEN:

SRI ANAND KOTRESHWAR SITHALE S/O KOTRESHWAR SITHALE, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, DIRECTOR (FORMER) R/AT NO.007, SLV RAJDRIVA APARTMENT, 19^TH MAIN, 5^TH BLOCK, 38^TH CROSS, PRAKRUTHI LAYOUT, HBR LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 043

…APPELLANT

(BY SMT. DEEPA.J, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 068

…RESPONDENT THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 374(2) OF CR.P.C (U/S 415(2) BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE DTD 26.09.2024 PASSED IN CC.NO.105/2024 BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES, AT BENGALURU.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1798 CRL.A No. 2618 of 2025

HC-KAR

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

ORAL JUDGMENT

The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed in C.C.No.105/2024 dated 26.09.2024 by the Special Court for Economic Offences, Bengaluru, which was confirmed by the LXIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-70) in Crl.A.No.1700/2024 dated 22.11.2025.

Hence, the office has rightly raised the objection that the criminal appeal is not maintainable before this Court. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following,

ORDER

i. The appeal is dismissed as not

maintainable.

ii. However, the liberty is reserved to the appellant to take necessary legal steps

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1798 CRL.A No. 2618 of 2025

HC-KAR

questioning the judgment passed by the First

Appellate Court in accordance with law.

iii. The appellant is also permitted to avail the benefit of provision of Section 14 of Indian Limitation Act.

iv. Office is directed to return the copy of the judgment to the appellant.

SD/(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

CR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12