A.M. Badar, J.

Heard the learned Advocate appearing for the applicants/accused Nos.8 and 9, who are reported to be Police Sub-Inspectors of Rajasthan Police Force. By this revision petition, these two accused persons are challenging the Order dated 31/07/2017 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai thereby rejecting their application (Exhibit 1059) for discharge from the Sessions Case commonly known as 'fake encounter case' in respect of Soharabuddin Shaikh, his wife Kauserbi and Tulshiram Prajapati.

2. From submission of the learned Advocate appearing for these revision petitioners, it is crystal clear that after rejection of discharge application (Exhibit 1059) filed by both these revision petitioners/accused Nos.8 and 9, the learned trial Court has framed charge against them and as of now 125 prosecution witnesses are already examined by the learned trial Court. Undisputedly, all these prosecution witnesses are cross-examined by the learned Advocate appearing for both these petitioners in that trial.

3. Though the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners submitted that he is pressing the revision petition by resorting the provisio