Dismissed

Amit Amarnath Vishwakarma v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC7 Nov 2019APPLN/151/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge dismissed an application challenging the non-appointment of a defense lawyer. Noting an order by the District Legal Aid Services Committee dated 25/04/2019, the Court held that no further orders were required and disposed of the application. Fees for the appointed amicus were directed to be paid.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of; order dated 25/04/2019 by District Legal Aid Services Committee deemed sufficient.

Amit Amarnath Vishwakarma Vs the State of Maharashtra — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

(23) APPLN-151-2019.doc

¶2

BDP-SPS

¶3

Bharat D. Pandit

¶4

Digitally signed by Bharat D.Pandit Date: 2019.11.11 10:09:56 +0530

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 151 OF 2019 (THROUGH JAIL)

¶6

Amit Amarnath Vishwakarma

¶7

…… Applicant.

¶8

V/s

¶9

The State of Maharashtra

¶10

……. Respondent.

¶11

Ms. Simantini Mohite – Amicus Curiae, appointed Advocate.
Mr. A.R. Kapadnis, APP for the State

¶12

CORAM: NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

¶13

DATE: NOVEMBER 7, 2019

¶14

P.C.:-

¶15

1] Ms. Simantini Mohite, learned Advocate was appointed by this

¶16

Court as an amicus curiae to espouse the cause of the accused who is

¶17

in custody and facing sessions trial being Sessions Case No.151 of
2016 pending on the file of Sessions Court, Thane.

¶18

2] The grievance which is espoused through the communication

¶19

addressed to this Court appears to be non-appointment of a defence
lawyer through the District Legal Aid Services Committee.

¶20

1/2

¶21

(23) APPLN-151-2019.doc

¶22

3]Since the order dated 25/04/2019 is passed by the Secretary,
District Legal Aid Services Committee, Thane providing legal services
to the accused, no further orders are required to be issued for
providing legal aid to the accused.

¶23

4] So far as other grievances of the accused are concerned, keeping option open to the accused to bring the same to the notice of the concerned Court, Application, in my opinion, deserves to be disposed of and the same is accordingly disposed of.

¶24

5] The learned Advocate who is appointed be paid her professional fees as per Rules/Schedule.

¶25

(NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. )

¶26

2/2

Amit Amarnath Vishwakarma v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Amarnath Vishwakarma 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

Damodar Chandratan Mohta Vs Mayur Kantilal Bhandari and Anr.

Rakesh Tukaram Koshti Vs the State of Maharashtra

The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Kuldeepsingh Pehersingh Kohli Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ishwar Prasad G. Khandelwal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Laxman Shivappa Valdadde and Ors.