JUDGMENT : 1. The appellants have been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and have been sentenced accordingly. 2. It is the submission of learned counsel for the applicants/appellants that it is a case of circumstantial evidence in which the chain of circumstances is not complete. Motive is lacking. The appellants were implicated on account of their extra judicial confession, which is a weak type of evidence. The applicants were not named in the first information report. They were implicated in the case only on account of suspicion. The investigation was conducted in the piecemeal. It is the statement of the first investigating officer that nothing concrete was found against the appellants although suspicion was writ large against them. 3. On perusal of the postmortem report, the medical officer has opined that the cause of death was hemorrhage and shock as a rapture liver. As many as, nine ante -mortem injuries were sustained by the victim. The appellants were also implicated on the basis of their being seen last in the company of the victim. 4. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the record of the case, we are of the view that the appellants should be granted bail during the pendency of the criminal appeal. Accordingly, let the accused-appellants Ajay Kukreti and Naveen Sundali be released on bail on their each executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties, each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal, during the pendency of present criminal appeal. 5. Deposition of fine shall be condition precedent for release of the appellants on bail during pendency of the present criminal appeal. 6. Urgency application No. 3050 of 2016 also stands disposed of.