Doli Ledha Ravidas v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC3 Nov 2025IA/3585/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Non-appearance of appellant in criminal appeal; grievance through jail interim application (IA No.3585 of 2025) against advocate Dhananjay Kendre for not sharing status/hearing information; one last chance to advocate; appointment of advocate from High Court Legal Services Committee panel if appellant still unrepresented; appeal listed 'for directions' on 12.11.2025; Bombay High Court; Manish Pitale and Manjusha Deshpande, JJ.; Doli Ledha Ravidas v. State of Maharashtra.

What did the court decide?

Appeal not finally disposed; one last chance given to Advocate Dhananjay Kendre to appear, and the appeal listed under the caption 'for directions' on 12.11.2025, failing which an advocate from the High Court Legal Services Committee panel is to be appointed for the appellant. ¶¶21

Doli Ledha Ravidas vs State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether any order needs to be passed regarding the necessity of proper representation of the appellant before this Court in the appeal, in view of the continued non-appearance and the appellant's grievance against Advocate Dhananjay Kendre.

¶¶16

Court's answer

Before passing any order on the necessity of proper representation of the appellant, one last chance is granted to Advocate Dhananjay Kendre to appear before this Court.

¶¶20

Ratio / Principle

If there is no appearance on behalf of the appellant on the next date, the Court would appoint an advocate from the panel maintained by the High Court Legal Services Committee to represent the appellant in this appeal.

¶¶22

Key takeaways

The Court observed that the allegations made against Advocate Dhananjay Kendre are serious.obiter¶¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction), Criminal Appeal No.741 of 2021 — Doli Ledha Ravidas v. State of Maharashtra (Manish Pitale & Manjusha Deshpande, JJ.; 03.11.2025): The appellant was absent both at admission (20.09.2021) and when the appeal was called out for hearing. An Interim Application No.3585 of 2025 filed by the appellant through jail alleged that Advocate Dhananjay Kendre, who had filed the appeal, was not providing information about its status and hearings. Observing the allegations to be serious, the Court, before deciding on the necessity of proper representation, granted one last chance to Advocate Dhananjay Kendre to appear, listed the appeal under the caption 'for directions' on 12.11.2025, and made clear that if the appellant remains unrepresented on the next date, an advocate from the panel maintained by the High Court Legal Services Committee would be appointed to represent the appellant.

¶1

26_APEAL741_21.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.741 OF 2021

¶4

Doli Ledha Ravidas … Appellant

¶5

Vs.

¶6

State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶7

WITH

¶8

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3585 OF 2025

¶9

¶10

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.741 OF 2021

¶11

None for Appellant. Ms. Sangita Phad, APP for Respondent-State.

¶12

CORAM : MANISH PITALE & MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : NOVEMBER 03, 2025

¶13

P.C. :

¶14

. This appeal was filed by Advocate Dhananjay Kendre. His name is shown in the cause-list. On 20.09.2021 when the appeal was admitted, there was no appearance on behalf of the appellant.

¶15

Even today, when the appeal is called out for hearing, there is no appearance on behalf of the appellant. The record shows that Interim Application No.3585 of 2025 is filed by the appellant through jail. In the said application, the appellant has made a grievance that the advocate, who had been instructed to file this appeal i.e. Advocate Dhananjay Kendre, has not been providing any information to the appellant with regard to the status and hearing of the appeal.

¶16

The allegations made against the said advocate are serious. But, we are of the opinion that before passing any order as regards necessity of proper representation of the appellant before this Court in this appeal,

¶17

MINALSANDIPPARAB Digitally signed byMINAL SANDIPPARABDate: 2025.11.0318:12:26 +0530

¶18

1/2

¶19

26_APEAL741_21.doc

¶20

it would be appropriate that one last chance is granted to Advocate Dhananjay Kendre to appear before this Court.

¶21

In that light, list this appeal under the caption ‘for directions’ on 12.11.2025.

¶22

It is made clear that if there is no appearance on behalf of the appellant on the next date also, we would be constrained to appoint an advocate from the panel maintained by the High Court Legal Services Committee to represent the appellant in this appeal.

¶23

(MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.)

¶24

(MANISH PITALE, J.)

¶25

Minal Parab

¶26

2/2

Doli Ledha Ravidas v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Doli Ledha Ravidas v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bharati G Patel and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra Thr the Government Pleader and Ors.

Sandeep Bhanudas Kotkar vs the State of Maharashtra

Ravindra @ Ravi Rambhau Wanare vs State of Maharashtra

Anjali Abhay Bhide vs Bank of Maharashtra

Shaheen Liykat Khan vs Bank of Baroda and Ors.

Kp Ridge Pvt. Ltd. Through its Director Pratik Bhupendra Shah vs Union Bank of India and Ors.