IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1538 of 2006 YOGENDRA PANDIT Versus GOPAL PANDIT & ORS ----------- 2 8.12.2008 Heard Mr. Naresh Chandra Verma, counsel for the petitioner. From the impugned order, it does not transpire that as to on what basis the Court below had come to a conclusion that the written statement filed by the defendant no.1 Gopal Pandit was also supposed to be the written statement of Suresh Pandit, defendant no.2. The entire narration and including affidavit in the written statement filed by Gopal Pandit would not give any inkling that such written statement was a joint written statement of both Gopal Pandit and Suresh Pandit. Moreover, the Court below has not only treated the said written statement of Suresh Pandit but also of Smt. Ram Pati Devi and they some how put their signature on the written statement filed by the defendant no.1 Gopal Pandit. At least from the certified copy of the written statement of Gopal Pandit, the facts as noted in the impugned order are not at all supported. It may be equally important to note here that this was initially not even the plea of the defendant nos. 2 & 3 that a joint written statement had been filed and infact that could not be treated so on account of the signature of only the defendant no.1 i.e. Gopal Pandit.. Apparently, there seem to be something amiss and the Court has proceeded on certain presumptions which are not supported by materials on record . Adopting the written statement by one of the 2 defendants by another co-defendant is an entirely different issue but to say that such a written statement was a joint written statement can not be accepted unless the same was intended to be so at the time of its filing. . In that view of the matter, this Court would set aside the impugned order and direct the Court below to reconsider the matter strictly in terms of the written statement on record filed by Gopal Pandit, which if in any manner may indicate that it was filed on behalf of the other defendants including defendant nos. 2 & 3, the Court below will proceed to allow them to put their signature but on the contrary, if there is nothing to show to it was a joint written statement, the Court will definitely not allow defendant no. 2 and 3 to do something which is/was not permissible in law. That being so, this Court would set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back for reconsideration and accordingly, this application stands permitted. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)