concerned, there has not been any evidence to prove the fact of extorting cash and jewelery from the prosecutrix under threat to eliminate her brother ... jewelery of his wife. There is no mention of respondent no.1 extorting or demanding cash and jewelery by threatening her. Further the prosecutrix
only to put pressure on the petitioner with a malafide intention of extorting money due to political reason. The petitioner further submits that the malafides ... attributes the FIR to legal malice and only as the way of extorting the penalty amount from the petitioner. The petitioner has, indeed, deposited
accused cannot be considered as accomplice as the same is extorted from them.
(4) Corroboration of evidence of a witness is required when his evidence
essential ingredient of offence under Section 395 IPC is that robbery or extortion has to be committed by five or more persons. However, according
essential ingredient of offence under Section 395 IPC is that robbery or extortion has to be committed by five or more persons. However, according
There was no allegation of extortion in the complainant under Section 107 and 116 Cr.P.C. nor has same been alleged by complainant. Even
accused respondent No.2 in association with other co-accused persons extorted
-2-
13-14 lacs rupees from the driver of Truck bearing registration
similar type of offence or is arrested in any offence of theft, extortion, robbery and dacoity, the bail granted to the petitioner in this case
granted anticipatory bail. The only allegation against the petitioner is that of extortion and not of causing any injury. There is no other case against
