R. C. DEEPAK, J. Since both the appeals arise from the same judgment and prayer for bail in both of them were heard together, therefore, they are decided by a common order. 2. I have heard Sri P. N. Misra, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Apul Misra, Sri S. P. S. Raghav and Sri D. R. Chaudhary, learned Counsel for the accused-appellants, Sri Viresh Misra, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Amit Misra, Sri J. S. Sengar, Sri V. P. Srivastava and Sri Mayank Agarwal, learned counsels for the complainant, Sri M. L. Shukla, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. 3. That the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the accused-appellants are that the presence of the two eye-witnesses is wholly doubtful. The medical evidence is incompatible with the version specially the manner of assault and non-examination of any independent witness including the employees of Restaurant, whose presence was admitted to the informant. It is contended that all these inconsistencies referred to above lead to the conclusion clearly that the F. I. R. was not in existence at the time as alleged. P. W. 1 (Sarvesh Kumar) has his own sweet shop at a distance of 2-1/2 kilometers from the alleged place of occurrence. His failure to give any specific reason for his presence for that day at the Restaurant adds strength to the above submission. The partition had already taken place between the deceased and the informant and M. I. T. contract stood exclusively with the name of the deceased (Vijay Kumar ). The informant absolutely had nothing to do with it. These are the circumstances, which exclude his presence at the Restaurant. In this context, the non-examination of any employee of the Restaurant further corroborates the position. 4. The medical conflict is also a very important factor in eliminating his presence at the spot. According to the informant two shots were fired from behind the victim by the accused persons. The deceased was sitting and the assailants were standing. One of the injuries i. e. injury No. 1 had shown a downward route. 15 pellets were recovered from the chest cavity, but the injury No. 2 shows rapture of the brain membrane and fracture of occipital bone. It clearly indicates that shot had travelled upwards. The entry wound is 2. 5 cms. One of the injuries i. e. injury No. 1 had shown a downward route. 15 pellets were recovered from the chest cavity, but the injury No. 2 shows rapture of the brain membrane and fracture of occipital bone. It clearly indicates that shot had travelled upwards. The entry wound is 2. 5 cms. from the mid line on the back of the neck, so it had travelled transversely to the left occipital. The fracture otherwise ought not to be there in the circumstances discussed above. The second shot apparently was fired when the victim after receiving the first injury had fallen to the ground. The informant has nowhere stated so. According to him, the victim fell on his back after he received injuries. 5. The presence of Vikas Gupta (P. W. 2) is wholly negatived on a perusal of his evidence. His failure to disclose on enquiry the names of two other accused to his uncle Sarvesh (P. W. 1) makes it abundantly clear, one of the two accused named Deepak Tyagi who was later on nominated by this witness was his class mate. The other unknown was also nominated by him. Therefore, it is inconceivable that if he was present he will not disclose their names on the enquiry made by his uncle before writing down the report to him. 6. I have only discussed the above inconsistencies available from the record. 7. In view of the above discussions, but without prejudice to the merits of the appeal, in my opinion the accused-appellants have made out a case for their release on bail. 8. Appellants Ajay Kumar Sharma and Anil Chaudhary convicted under Section 302 IPC in Sessions Trial No. 1440 of 2003 shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned. 9. The realization of fine shall also remain stayed during the pendency of their appeal before this Honble Court. 10. The appellants shall furnish an undertaking also before the C. J. M. concerned that they will not indulge in any criminal activities and will not cause either any threat or any physical violence to the informant and their family members and to the witnesses of the case. 10. The appellants shall furnish an undertaking also before the C. J. M. concerned that they will not indulge in any criminal activities and will not cause either any threat or any physical violence to the informant and their family members and to the witnesses of the case. If any such report is made by any of the above person either to the Court or the police, it shall be properly inquired into and if any substance therein is found, it shall be open for the Court below to report to this Court so that the bail may be cancelled. Bail granted. .