IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.19725 of 2010 FULO SADA @ FULESHWAR SADA . Versus STATE OF BIHAR . ----------- 05/ 12.10.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. This petition for bail has been filed by the petitioner, who is an accused for offences punishable under sections 302, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of Arms Act. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and is in custody since 29.04.2010, although he has got no criminal antecedent. He further submits that the entire materials of the prosecution would show that the petitioner has no role to play in the alleged killings and the only allegation against him is that two to three days before the carnage, a meeting was held in his house. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State averred that the petitioner is the husband of mukhiya and is the head of the land grabbers and had held meeting of such grabbers directing them that unless some people are killed they won’t be able to grab the lands from its owners. He further submits that in the said circumstances, carnage took place on the date of occurrence when the said land grabbers brutally murdered sixteen persons in village Amousi at the instance of the petitioner. 5. In the afore-said facts and circumstances, this court 2 does not find any reason to allow this petition which is accordingly, dismissed. Ranjan (S. N Hussain, J.)