Step 1: Understand the question.
We must find which option is NOT a needed ingredient for the offence of abduction under Section 362 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Step 2: Read the definition of abduction.
Section 362 says: whoever by force compels, or by deceitful means induces, any person to go from any place, abducts that person. So the key parts are: a person is moved, and the moving is caused by force or by deceit.
Step 3: Test option 1.
Option 1 talks about compelling or inducing a person to move from one place to another. This is exactly inside the definition. So it is a true ingredient and cannot be the answer.
Step 4: Test option 3.
Option 3 talks about using force or deceitful means. Section 362 needs either force or deceit. So this too is a real ingredient and cannot be the answer.
Step 5: Compare abduction with kidnapping.
In kidnapping from lawful guardianship, the victim must usually be a minor or of unsound mind. But abduction has no such age rule. An adult, a child, or an old person can all be abducted. So minority is NOT required for abduction.
Step 6: Reach the answer.
Calling abduction a continuing offence is just a description, not the deciding test. The clear point is that the victim need not be a minor. So the option that is NOT a required ingredient is the one saying the abducted person must be a minor.
\[ \boxed{\text{The person abducted must be a minor}} \]