' This is a petition for quashment under section 561-A, Cr. P. C. On 21-10-1975, a case under section 363, P. P. C. Was registered against the petitioners at Police Station New Anarkali, Lahore, at the instance of Amir Khan father of Sadiqa Sultan, who was alleged to have been abducted two months prior to the registration of the case. The challan after completion was submitted in the Court of Magistrate, First Class, Lahore, on 28-7-1976.
2. Learned cDunsel appearing in support of this petition submitted that since the filing of the challan in Court, so far only one witness, that is, the girl had been examined. It was submitted that she did not implicate any of the petitioners. On the other hand she deposed that being sui juris she voluntarily married petitioner No. 1.
' Learned counsel then referred to Criminal Miscellaneous No. 133/H of 1976, filed by petitioner No.
1. In that petition. Mst. Sadiqa Sultan gave her statement in this Court which was to the following effect :- "I have come from Mughalpura from the house of Lal Khan. He is a relation of my father. I was kept confined by Lal ' Khan respondent. I want to reside with Mumaraz.
' Thereafter, the learned Judge by means of his order dated 8-3-1976, directed :- "In view of the statement made by the girl she is set at liberty to go wherever she likes."
In such circumstances, learned counsel submitted that the present prosecution is not only mala fide but amounts to an abuse of the process of the Court.
I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. The statements of Mst. Sadiqa Sultan before the Magistrate as well as before this Court clearly established that she was not abducted but whatever happened to her was with her consent. I have not come across any evidence to show that she was under sixteen. On the other hand, there is enough material on the record to prove that she was sui furls.
' Even otherwise I think the prosecution does not seem to be serious in pursuing the matter because from July 1976 uptil today only one witness had been examined. In such circumstances I do not think any useful purpose will be served if these proceedings are kept pending. I, therefore, allow this petition and quash the proceedings pending against the petitioners in the Court of the learned Magistrate.