New Delhi, June 4 -- The Supreme Court has scoffed at law enforcers turning into alleged extortionists as it cancelled the anticipatory bail granted to three policemen who intimidated, abused and extorted money from a jeweller at Mumbai Central railway station for carrying a gold bar in his baggage. A bench of justices Sanjay Kumar and K Vinod Chandran, in an order passed on May 27, uploaded recently, said, "When law enforcers turn extortionists, the citizen looks askance and is left in a dilemma." The Bombay high court granted bail to the three accused policemen in September 2025, almost a month after the FIR was registered on August 17 last year. The complaint stated that the jeweller had arrived at the railway station to board a train and was travelling with his minor daughter. The cops, posted with the sabotage-detection cell on a routine inspection at the railway station, stopped the complainant and his daughter for a search. His bag had a 14-gm gold bar and some cash. He was taken to a room where he alleged that the policemen verbally abused, intimidated and confiscated his gold, forcing him to pay money. The complainant showed them his identity card and valid documents for possessing gold. Noting the "distress" the complainant had to undergo, the bench remarked, "To confront, is to invite instant retaliation and the option is only to succumb meekly to the uniformed authority, even when there is patent abuse." The anticipatory bail to the cops was challenged in the top court by the state, which argued that "such uniformed excesses on the citizens" cannot be tolerated. The court was informed that the three officers have since been dismissed from service after holding a proper enquiry. Further, they requested the court to allow the accused persons to be taken in for custodial interrogation. The bench cancelled the bail order and said that though the allegations required to be tested during trial, if found true, it "erodes the credibility of the force and vitiates the trust placed on them to maintain law and order." The accused argued that the state was unnecessarily being "vindictive" towards them as they had an unblemished service of 20 years. They further alleged that the allegations against them was cooked up as there was a two-day delay in filing the complaint....