Ranjana Desai, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties, taken up for hearing and final disposal.

2. These two writ petitions can be disposed of by a common judgment because the parties and the facts involved in both the petitions are the same.

3. It is necessary to begin with the facts of the case. It is the case of the prosecution that on 16/6/2007, the petitioners committed offences under Sections 395, 397, 342, 452, 457, 506(II), 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “the IPC”) read with Sections 4, 5, 25 of the Arms Act read with Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act within the jurisdiction of Pant Nagar Police Station, Mumbai.

4. The case was registered vide C.R. No.155 of 2007. The investigation of the said CR was transferred to DCB, CID, Mumbai, and the case was numbered as CR No.39 of 2007. During the course of investigation, the petitioners were arrested. The provisions of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 (for short, “the MCOCA”) came to be invoked and the charge sheet came to be filed against the petitioners before the designated Special Court (for short, “the Special Court”) on 12/10/2007 and the said case was numbered as MCOC Special Case No.23 of 2007.

5. On 17/6/2007, the petitioners committed offences under Sections 395, 397, 342, 452, 457, 459, 460 of the IPC read with Sections 4, 5 and 25 of the Arms Act read with Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act within the jurisdiction of Versova Police Station, Mumbai, and the case was registered vide CR No.147 of 2007. The investigation of the said case was transferred to DCB, CID, Mumbai. The case was numbered as CR No.60 of 2007. During the course of investigation of the said case, the petitioners were arrested and after completion of the investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed on 18/10/2007 before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 37th Court and the said case was committed to the Sessions Court, Mumbai, and it was numbered as Sessions Case No.23 of 2008. The said case is pending trial.

6. On 19/6/2007, the petitioners committed offences under Sections 395, 397, 342, 452 and 457 of the IPC read with Sections 4, 5 and 25 of the Arms Act read with Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act within the jurisdiction of Tilak Nagar Police Station, Mumbai, and the case was registered vide C.R. No.146 of 2007. The investigation of the said case was transferred to DCB, CID, Mumbai. The case was numbered as C.R. No.37 of 2007. During the course of investigation of the said case, the petitioners were arrested and after completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 37th Court, on 28/9/2007. The case was committed to the Sessions Court, Mumbai, and was numbered as Sessions Case No.33 of 2008. The said case is pending trial.

7. On 16/6/2008, an application came to be filed before the Sessions Court, Mumbai, in Sessions Case No.23 of 2008 and Sessions Case No.33 of 2008 referring to Section 10 of the MCOCA and praying that trial of the said cases be kept in abeyance till conclusion of MCOC Special Case No.23 of 2007. According to the prosecution, certain documents are common in all these cases and the original documents are deposited in MCOC Special Case No.23 of 2007. The said documents are as under :

“1. Weapon Recovery Panchnama dated 2/8/2007

2. Property Recovery Panchnama dated 1/9/2007

3. Panchnama of Identification of property dated 7/9/2007

4. Statement of witness Namdeo Hangarge recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.”

8. On the said application, the Sessions Court, Mumbai, passed an order on 11/7/2008, keeping the trial in Sessions Case No.23 of 2008 and Sessions Case No.33 of 2008 in abeyance till conclusion of trial of MCOC Special Case No.23 of 2007. This order is under challenge in these petitions.

9. We have heard, at some length, Mr. Chitnis, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners. Mr. Chitnis