' The facts and the law being pleaded by the learned counsel for the petitioner in support of this petition have persuaded me to admit this petition to regular hearing and to dispose it of as a notice case so that the matter could be considered in some detail. Admit. Notice.
2. Mr. Hasnat Ahmad Khan, A.A.-G. Present in Court accepts notice. Both the learned counsel have no objection to the disposal of this petition today, as a notice case.
3. Claiming to be the legally-wedded spouses of each other, the two petitioners seek quashment of an F.I.R. Bearing No,557/1996 of Police Station Ferozewala of District Sheikhupura on the ground that they had committed no offence in the eyes of law by having married each other and further that in the circumstances, the F.I.R. In question should be declared to be of no legal effect.
4. In the exercise of this extraordinary Constitutional jurisdiction, it is not possible for this Court to give declarations about the validity or the existence of I A an alleged marriage. In any case the petitioners have adequate remedies available to them; firstly, before the investigating officer; secondly, before the higher police officers who are also S.H.Os. By virtue of section 551 of the Cr.P.C.; thirdly, before the competent Magistrate who has powers under section 63 of the Cr.P.C. To discharge accused persons; fourthly, before the competent Magistrate who has the power to cancel cases under Rule 24.7 of the Police Rules; fifthly, before the competent Magistrate who gets seized of the matter under section 190 of the Cr.P.C. And finally before the learned trial Court at different stages of the proceedings before it. In view of such a large number of remedies available to the petitioners it could not be said that they were without an adequate and alternate remedy which renders this petition incompetent.
5. There is yet another aspect of this case. Though the present proceedings, as has been mentioned above, are not the kind of proceedings where I would consider it appropriate to give a declaration about the existence or the legality of the alleged marriage, yet the fact remains that such a marriage which is generally known as a 'run-away marriage' in our society, is not an appreciable act and thus the ones involved in such an act are not the kind. Of persons who could be found entitled to a relief in equity or to a relief as a result of exercise of the discretionary jurisdiction of this Court.
6. In view of what has been noticed above, this petition is dismissed.