JUDGMENT 1. - This application under section 482 Cr. P. C. is presented by Mst. Suraj against whom the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Merta, has taken cognizance under sections 342 and 384 IPC. Her prayer is that the charge against her be quashed because there is absolutely no evidence against her.I heard arguments and perused the record. 2. One Multan Mai filed a Complaint against five persons on 14-4-75 that Mst. Suraj wife of Jai Chand came to his house two months before and placed some cloth in his house saying that she was keeping this cloth apart for her daughter Kiran as the members of her family have an objection to save cloth for the daughter and out of greed they sell it away. On 2-3-75 Mst. Suraj, her husband, her son and one Sampat Raj came to their house in the morning and alleged that the complainant had stolen the cloth. The accused then carried him to their house and called one Hari Singh accused No. 5. They threatened the complainant that both he and his wife are likely to be involved in a criminal case. They will rot in the jail unless he transferred his land in their name. Next morning they carried him to Degana and a deed of sale of his land was prepared. The deed was also registered. He was detained for two days in Degana for the purpose of mutation. His relative Gulb Puri came to Degana and reprimanded the accused who agreed to have the sale deed cancelled within a month's time. After one month they refused to cancel the deed and but however, agreed to deliver half of the land to him. He therefore, prayed that he has been a victim of conspiracy, fraud and cheating. 3. The learned magistrate examined Multan under section 200 Cr. P.C. on 15-4-75. In this statement the complainant stated that when Mst. Suraj said that she did not place any cloth in the house of the complainant, then accused Jai Chand, Sampat, Mahavir, Harisingh and Richhpal came to his house and asked him to deliver the stolen cloth. Those persons carried away the clothes of his wife, and daughter. They took him to their shop and made him execute a Khata for Rs. 8,000. They carried him to Degana and got a sale deed of his land executed and registered. 4. Those persons carried away the clothes of his wife, and daughter. They took him to their shop and made him execute a Khata for Rs. 8,000. They carried him to Degana and got a sale deed of his land executed and registered. 4. The complainant produced four witnesses under section 202 Cr. P.C. Bhanwari wife of the complainant stated that Mst. Suraj had placed two bundles of cloth with her saying that she will give the same to her daughter. When Sampat Raj came to know of it, then the accused Jai Chand, Sampat Raj, Mahavir, Sooraj and Hari Singh came to their house. Sampat Raj asked her to deliver cloth. Thereupon Mst. Bhanwari produced the cloth left with her by Mst. Suraj. The accused then carried her husband to their house. Gulab Puri is a witness who arrived at the scene in Degana after the alleged deed have been executed and registered. Madan Singh did not support the complainant while Hari Ram said that the sale deed bears his attestation. It upon this evidence that the cognizance was taken by the learned magistrate as aforesaid. 5. The learned counsel for the complainant submitted that there was conspiracy in which Mst. Suraj was involved. Though the magistrate has not taken cognizance under section 120 B IPC, yet it is most likely that after the evidence is recorded, the complainant may be able to prove that Mst. Suraj was also accused in the conspiracy. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is absolutely on evidence against Mst. Suraj and she cannot be prosecuted simply in the hope that the complainant will be able to bring forth more evidence against her at the time of the trial. 7. I have considered over the rival submissions and it appears to me that from the statements of the witnesses produced by the complainant, no case under section 342 IPC is made out against Mst. Suraj. It will be an abuse of the process of court if Mst. Suraj is allowed to be prosecuted further in these proceedings. 8. I therefore, consider it a fit case in which the powers under section 482 Cr. P. C. deserves to be exercised. Accordingly, this application is accepted and the proceedings against Mst. Suraj are hereby quashed. *******