The prosecution failed to prove the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt due to evidentiary inconsistencies.

2. It is prosecution’s case that accused was a police constable in the Detection Branch of Taloja Police Station. On 09/11/1998 a tempo owned by one Ramvilas Hullu Rajbhar and driven by Ramdayal Hullu Rajbhar (P.W. 3), both residents of Dombivali, was stopped by accused. The tempo owner Ramvilas was having business of sale and purchase of scrap for the last four years. Ramvilas used to sell scrap to one Brijlal and Company at Taloja. On 09/11/1998 two persons stopped the tempo, one of them informed Ramdayal (P.W. 3) that he is a policeman and enquired about the scrap material in the tempo and also demanded papers of the tempo. When P.W. 3 showed and handed over all the papers to accused, accused demanded Rs.15,000/- from P.W. 3 for returning the papers. Accused, it is alleged also slapped P.W. 3. Accused informed P.W. 3, who told accused that he was only a driver, to bring the owner with the money and until then the papers will not be returned. Ramvilas, owner of tempo came to Taloja, met accused and requested for returning the vehicle papers but accused refused to return until the amount was paid. Accused also threatened to involve Ramvilas and Ramdayal (P.W. 3) in some false case. Subsequently, amount was negotiated and brought down to Rs.3,000/-.

3. Two weeks later, on 23/11/1998, Ramvilas and Ramdayal (P.W. 3) met accused and requested him to hand over the papers but again there was a demand of Rs.3,000/- from the accused and accused informed them to bring amount at 11.00 a.m. on 25/11/1998 to Putti Bhangarwala near Pendhar Phata where after the amount was paid he would return the papers. No explanation could be found anywhere for the gap of two weeks between 09/11/1998 and 25/11/1998. Therefore, P.W. 3 and Ramvilas who was owner of the tempo went to Anti Corruption Bureau Office, reported the matter and after completing pre-trap formalities, a trap was laid. On 25/11/1998, P.W. 3, along with panch witness P.W. 1, came with the money and were waiting near Pendhar Phata. Accused came to the spot at about 12.00 noon in an auto rickshaw and stopped near a tea stall. Accused asked P.W. 3 about money and when P.W. 3 told him that he has brought money with him, accused demanded money. P.W. 3 told him that unless the papers are handed over he would not pay over the money. Therefore, accused left the place in the same auto rickshaw and came back within ten minutes with the papers. After P.W. 3 handed over money, accused gave the papers to P.W.3. Thereafter, raiding party, which was spread near about and were keeping watch on the happenings, after receiving signal from the complainant, rushed ahead and caught hold of accused in the auto rickshaw. When the hands of accused were checked under ultra-violat lamp, traces of of anthracene powder was found on the hands of accused. Post trap panchanama was drawn. Investigation commenced. After investigation, sanction to prosecute accused was obtained and then charge-sheet was filed.

4. To bring home the charge, prosecution led evidence of five witnesses namely P.W. - 1 Yogesh Vishwanath Sangade, Panch, P.W. - 2 Sudhakar Mukund Ambedkar, Sanctioning Authority, P.W. - 3 Ramdayal Hullu Rajbhar, Complainant, P.W. - 4 Baburao Kisanji Gavrane, Police Inspector of Taloja Police Station and P.W. - 5 Bharat Maruti Saravade, Investigating Officer.

5. P.W. 4 was called to depose only to find out whether on 09/11/1998 when the tempo was stopped by accused whether there was any offence recorded. He has answered in th