Nope, when it's so easy to resolve and you're using block chords, you should resolve them by default. The issue with that chord is what I said, but combined with the fact that that 4-note voicing is a bit muddy (you have so many notes, four, but yet "chose" not to resolve the 7th is quite jarring). If in the 2nd beat you have the 7th in the melody, then you could remove it from the left hand. Thus, in beats 2-3 a more idiomatic left hand could have the chords voiced as 1-3-7 and 1-3-5 (assuming the 1st beat has an F or a C).
You have a 13th in the melody (that D), over a dominant chord. That needs to resolve by step, not by skip, it's non-negotiable, this kind of non-chord tones in this context must resolve unless they're échappés. 11th and 13th chords don't exist as any sort or remotely stable sonority in that period. This is true for any music of at least until 1-2 generations after Chopin died.
This is exactly the opposite of how cadences work.
The bass note needs to move from F to Bb, this is non-negotiable in that style, you need a strong cadence at structural moments. Using inverted chords is the opposite of what is needed here. Go analyze 10 Chopin mazurkas, locate every perfect cadence, and understand when they're used.
Huh? Not doubling the leading-tone is one of the most basic rules of part-writing, esp. with so few voices available. On top of that, you're combining it with doubling the 3rd in a 1st inversion chord, which should be avoided except in a few cases like when the bass is the 1st or 4th degree. I have Chopin's complete album of mazurkas by my side, check out the second one and absorb the way he does it (how he voices a V7 in 1st inversion and when he uses it).