IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.3992 of 2010 RAJ KUMAR MAHTO @ RAJ KUMAR MEHTA Son of Kailash Mahto Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3/ 16.04.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence under Section 3/4 of the Explosive Substance Act. Learned counsel has referred to an F.I.R., as contained in Annexure-2, bearing Rafiganj P.S. case no. 107 of 2009 dated 04.08.2009 instituted upon the fardbeyan of the son of the petitioner, aged about 12 years. The informant’s son stated that while he was returning, he picked up a stick about 1” long fitted with two wire near the road, which was being constructed. As soon as he tried to touch the wire it exploded and he became unconscious. The police in course of investigation even searched the house of the petitioner. The informant smelt something foul and also found some blood stains wiped. He further alleged that a country made detonator like substance was recovered from the house. Learned counsel submits that it cannot be said with certainty that the detonator like substance, which was recovered, is actually a detonator. He further submits that informant unjustly implicated him in this case, when his son was already convalescing in the hospital. Counsel for the State opposes the bail and submits that detonator like substance was recovered from the premises of the - 2 - petitioner. In facts of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. His prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. However, if he surrenders before the court below (Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad in connection with Rafiganj P.S. case no. 108 of 2009) and seeks regular bail, the same would be disposed of preferably on the same day without being prejudiced by this order. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)