RAM KARAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The allegations made in this Habeas Corpus Petition against the respondents are that on 7-8-1998, respondent Nos. 5 to 14 came in a jeep in the late night hour at about 1.00 a.m. with arms and forcibly kidnapped Mst. Chando daughter of Shri Ramkaran, by intruding

(2.) In this matter the relevant aspect to be considered is as to whether the requirements of Section 164, Cr. P.C. were complied with by the learned Magistrate, Dausa, while recording the statement of Mst. Chando. Section 164, Cr. P.C. mandates as under:-

(3.) As per the requirement of Section 164 Cr. P.C. as referred to above, what is expected of a learned Magistrate, is to see that when the statement is recorded it should be the free and voluntary act of the person appearing before the Magistrate and if that person stated that he/she is willing to make the confession, the learned Magistrate, before recording any such confession or