SH. AHMAD FAROOQ, J.---Through the instant petition, under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of F.I.R. No 20 of 2011, dated 28-1-2011, registered in Police Station, Chutiana, District Toba Tek Singh, under section 365-B, P.P.C.
2. The allegation against the petitioner in the above said F.I.R. is that he along with other co- accused trespassed into the house of the complainant at night, detained the complainant and his other family members in a room, on gun point, and committed the abduction of his niece, namely, Sumaira Irshad, with an intention to commit with her illicit intercourse. It is also alleged in the F.I.R. that the accused while leaving his house have also committed theft of 15 tolas of gold ornaments, cash amounting,to Rs,30,000 and Saudi Riyal 3000 from his house.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that story narrated in the F.I.R. is totally false and fabricated. The learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as the so-called abductee, namely, Sumaira Irshad, being sui juris has contracted a valid marriage with the petitioner but the same being against the wishes of her parents, the petitioner and his other family members have been involved in the instant case, just to pressurize him to give divorce to his legally wedded wife. The learned counsel argued that from the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kabirwala, dated 15-1-2011 is evident that the alleged abductee has entered into a valid nikah' with the petitioner of her own free will and consent. The learned counsel thus, contended that as the alleged abductee has not supported the case of the prosecution, and there being no chance of conviction of the petitioner, further proceeding in the case would amount to abuse of the process of the Court. The learned counsel finally, argued that in the given circumstances, further proceedings in the F.I.R. may be quashed.
4. Report and parawise comments have been submitted by the S.H.O., Police Station, Chutiana, District Toba Tek Singh, in which it has been stated that the petitioner and other co-accused. have not joined the investigation. The recovery of stolen articles is yet to be effected from the accused persons.
5. On 17-3-2011, at the request of the alleged abductee/Mst. Sumaira Irsliad, she was ordered to be lodged in Darul Aman'. She has been produced before this court from 'Darul Aman'. She has opted to accompany her parents. She is allowed to do so.
6. The petitioner and other co-accused are facing serious allegation of abduction and theft of valuable articles from the house of the complainant and their person is required for effecting recovery of the stolen articles. The petitioner has not so far joined the investigation to prove his innocence. This court has no jurisdiction whatsoever to take the role of the Investigating Agency while exercising its powers under Article 199 of the Constitution. Needless to mention here that determination of innocence or otherwise of the accused/present petitioner totally depends upon the production of evidence during the trial. In case, the petitioner thinks that the prosecution has not sufficient evidence available against him to prove his guilt, he would have an alternate efficacious remedy under section 249-A, Cr.P.C. for seeking his acquittal from the learned trial Court. Furthermore, the impugned F.I.R. and the proceedings being conducted thereon cannot be quashed at this stage as the saine are neither coram non judice nor being conducted in violation of the procedure or amount to abuse of the process of law.
7.In view of the above discussion, it is held that the instant petition is without any substance or legal force and the same is accordingly, dismissed.