Disposed

Vijay Bhivajirao Palande v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC10 Jan 2017APPA/906/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court in criminal appeal dismissed an application from an impecunious appellant praying for discharge of his advocate. Noting the failure to appoint new counsel after a final notice, the court adjourned to a future date; failing appointment, a legal aid lawyer would proceed.

What did the court decide?

The application was disposed of with the matter adjacent for a further hearing on a specified date.

Vijay Bhivajirao Palande Vs the State of Maharashtra — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

5a. cri appa 906-16.doc

¶2

RMA

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 906 OF 2016 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 469 OF 2003

¶5

Vijay Bhivajirao Palande .. Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondent

¶6

Appearances

¶7

Mrs. S.D. Shinde APP for the State

¶8

CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI & REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ.

¶9

DATE : JANUARY 10, 2017.

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

The applicant has preferred this application through jail

¶12

stating that he wants to change Advocates Shri. Kuldeep Patil who is on record. He has prayed that the Advocate be

¶13

discharged.

¶14

The appeal of the appellant i.e applicant was initially

¶15

filed by Advocate Shri. Siddharth Tayade. Adv. Tayade thereafter stood discharged and Advocate Ms. Rohini

¶16

jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 3

¶17

5a. cri appa 906-16.doc

¶18

Dandekar was appointed as the Advocate from the Legal Aid Panel. Subsequently, Mr. Kuldeep Patil, Advocate filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the appellant. Thereafter, the appellant preferred the present application with the prayer as mentioned in paragraph one above, hence, in the order dated 18.8.2016, Registry was directed to issue notice to the applicant-appellant intimating that Advocate Shri. Kuldeep

¶19

Patil is now discharged and whether the appellant is engaging any other lawyer to represent him in the appeal. The notice was also to indicate that in absence of any response from the appellant, this Court would provide a lawyer to represent the appellant from the Legal Aid Panel. Notice was made returnable after four weeks. This notice was served on the appellant on 16.9.2016. However, it is seen that though sufficient time is given to the appellant, no Advocate has been appointed to represent him in the appeal, hence, as a last chance, we adjourn the matter to 23rd January, 2017. On that day, if no Advocate is appointed by the appellant, the Advocate from Legal Aid Panel who has

¶20

jfoanz vkacsjdj 2 of 3

¶21

5a. cri appa 906-16.doc

¶22

already been appointed will work out the appeal.

¶23

In view of above, the application is disposed of.

¶24

[ REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. ] [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]

¶25

jfoanz vkacsjdj 3 of 3

Vijay Bhivajirao Palande v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Bhivajirao Palande v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satyandra Dinnath Mishra Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ravichand Madanchand Thakur @ Raja Thakur Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Santbali Dwarika Barai Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vijay Bhivajirao Palande Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mohmad Naim Nabi Mohmad Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bhimrao Ganpat Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra