Raj Jayram Kamble v. The State Of Maharashtra

Dixit

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1243 OF 2017 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL (STAMP) NO.741 OF 2017 Raj Jayram Kamble (Through Jail) ....

Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ....

Respondent None for the Applicant.

Mrs. G.P. Mulekar, A.P.P., for the Respondent-State. CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI & DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.J.

DATE : 13TH SEPTEMBER, 2017.

P.C. :

1.

The Applicant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 341, 323, 506 (Part II) of IPC and under Section 3 r/w. 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012 by the learned Special Judge (POCSO Act) and the Additional Sessions Judge, Raigad, Alibag by Judgment and Order dated 31st January 2017 in Special Case (POCSO) No.85 of 2016.

2.

Being aggrieved thereby, the Applicant-Appellant has preferred 1/2 APPA-1243-17==.doc

Criminal Appeal (Stamp) No.741 of 2017. As there is delay in preferring the said Appeal, the Applicant has preferred an application for condonation of delay i.e. Criminal Application No.1241 of 2017 in Criminal Appeal (Stamp) No.741 of 2017. Applicant has also preferred an application for bail in the said Appeal i.e. Criminal Application No.1242 of 2017.

3.

The prayer in the present application is that, an Advocate be appointed from the 'Legal Aid Panel' to represent the Applicant in his Appeal as well as his application for condonation of delay and application for bail.

4.

In view of the prayer made by the Applicant in the present application, we appoint Ms. Rohini Dandekar, who is on the 'Panel of Advocates of the High Court Legal Services Committee', to represent the Applicant in his Appeal as well as application for delay and application for bail.

5.

The application is allowed in the above terms. [DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.] [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] 2/2 APPA-1243-17==.doc