A case under section 10/ 11. Of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 and section .380, P. P. C. Was registered by the Police Station of Misri Shah, Lahore against the brothers of the petitioners vide F. I. R. No. 276, dated 20-11-1982 at the instance of the complainant namely Nazir Ahmad. It is alleged in the F. I. R. That in the absence of the complainant and his wife, his sister Mst. Hidayat Bibi aged 18/19 years (unmarried) was abducted by Bashir Ahmad and Nazir Ahmad, the real brothers of the petitioners alongwith certain clothes and jewellery. The above-said accused had abducted Mst. Hidayat Bibi for the purpose of marrying her with Nazir Ahmad.
2. The abductee after about a month herself appeared before the Police on 6-12-1982. Her statement under section 164, Cr. P. C. Was got recorded by the Police on 8-12-1982 in which she stated apart from the fact as to her abduction that she was kept by Bashir Ahmad for 8/10 days in his village (Chak No. 547-E. B.) and later on she was kept at the rnatur of Nangay Baba. During this period the petitioners remained with her. Bashir Ahmad co-accused had committed rape upon her twice. Bashir Ahmad co-accused relied upon a nikahnama as to his marriage with the abductee.
On the face of the nikahnama both the co-accused namely Bashir Ahmad and Nazir Ahmad were admitted to bail by the (earned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore vide order dated 16-2-1983.
3. It is stated by the Investigating Officer that the petitioners have been declared as Proclaimed Offenders by Ch. Muhammad Bashir, Magistrate First Class. He has said that he himself went to trace out the peti--tioners but could not find them at their residence so he initiated the pro-- ceedings for getting them declared as Proclaimed Offenders.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the petitioners have been involved in the case simply because they are the real sisters of the co-accused and as to their absconsion it has been submitted that the ladies had no information since they were not primarily accused persons according .To the facts as set out in the F. I. R. It was only subsequently that they were regarded so in the statement of the abductee under section 164, Cr. P. C.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the State while resisting the grant of bail has admitted that the only role attributed to the petitioners is that they remained with the abductee when she was kept by Bashir Ahmad co-accused. The Investigating Officer states that the ladies have joined the investigation.
6. There is nothing as direct to connect the petitioners with the commission of the offence of abduction except that they remained alongwith the abductee; as to whether the behaviour of the petitioners as such is culpable, the case depends upon further inquiry as to the guilt of the petitioners so as to attract subsection (2) of section 49.7, Cr. P. Therefore, pre-arrest interim bail already granted to the petitioners is hereby confirmed: