Laxman @ Pintu Sarjerao Londhe v. The State Of Maharashtra

5.APPW353_2015.doc Vidya Amin

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 353 OF 2016 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2298 OF 2015 Laxman @ Pintu Sarjerao Londhe ...

Applicant Vs.

The State of Maharashtra ...

Respondent None for the applicant.

Mr. Arfan Sait, APP for the Respondent - State CORAM: SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI AND MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.

DATE: AUGUST 25, 2016 P.C.:

The applicant in Criminal Application No. 353 of 2016 has stated that he has preferred Writ Petition No. 2298 of 2015 and Criminal Application no. 264 of 2015. The said Writ Petition and Application are preferred through jail. The applicant in this Application has prayed that the Vakalatnama of Advocate Satyavrat Joshi be accepted in this case. 2.

We have sent a message to Advocate Satyavrat Joshi, who appeared before us. He has stated that he has no instructions to appear in any of the matters preferred by the applicant, hence, it is not possible for him to represent the applicant in the said matter. Moreover, Advocate Satyavrat Joshi is not on the Legal Aid Panel, hence, it is not possible for this Court to appoint him.

1 / 2

5.APPW353_2015.doc 3.

Looking to the fact that the Writ Petition 2298 of 2015 and Criminal Application no. 264 of 2015 are preferred through jail, we appoint Advocate Ms. Rohini Dandekar, who is on the panel of advocates of the High Court Legal Services Committee to represent the petitioner in the Petition and in Application No. 264 of 2015.

4.

Criminal Application no. 353 of 2016 is disposed of in above terms. (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) (MRS. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.) 2 / 2