Can he give the policeman money so that he will not fine him for breaking traffic rules?
Question

                I have a taxi. I have unintentionally passed a red light. If one does this intentionally the fine is 500 dinar and if he does it unintentionally the fine is about 150 dinar. 

The question: 

The policeman asked me to buy him a meal in return for giving me my papers back and not fine me. Is this considered a bribe or just help?.
Praise be to Allah.
    Stopping at the traffic lights is obligatory, because they 
    were set up in the public interest, to regulate the flow of traffic and 
    protect lives and property. If people drove on the streets ignoring these 
    signals, that would result in a great deal of trouble for them, as is well 
    known. 

    Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) issued a 
    fatwa stating that it is not permissible to run a red light. He regarded 
    that as coming under the heading of obeying the authorities, which is 
    obligatory, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):  

    “O you who believe! Obey Allaah and obey the Messenger 
    (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم), and those 
    of you (Muslims) who are in authority”

    [al-Nisa’ 4:59]. 

    Liqaa’aat al-Baab il-Maftooh 
    (3/178), question no. 1265 

    As for making the one who breaks these laws pay a certain 
    fine, this comes under the heading of financial disciplinary punishments, 
    which is permissible according to many scholars, such as Abu Yoosuf, the 
    companion of Abu Haneefah; it is also the earlier view of al-Shaafa’i and 
    was the view of some of the Maalikis; it was also the view favoured by Ibn 
    Taymiyah and Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on them all). 

    Ibn al-Qayyim said: With regard to ta’zeer (disciplinary 
    punishments) in the form of financial penalties, this is also prescribed in 
    certain cases according to the view of Maalik and Ahmad, and one of the two 
    views of al-Shaafa’i. The Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah  (peace and 
    blessings of Allaah be upon him) and his companions also mentions that in 
    some cases, such as when the Prophet  (peace and blessings of Allaah be 
    upon him) ordered that the vessels and containers of wine be broken; when he 
    ordered ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar to burn the two garments that were dyed with 
    safflower; and when on the day of Khaybar he ordered that the pots in which 
    the flesh of domesticated donkeys had been cooked be broken, then they asked 
    him for permission to wash them and he gave them permission. This indicates 
    that both things are permissible, because the penalty is not necessarily by 
    breaking. Another example is when he demolished the mosque of the 
    hypocrites; when he burned the belongings of the one who had stolen from the 
    war booty before it had been shared out; when he took half of the wealth of 
    the one who had withheld zakaah, on the orders of Allaah; when he ordered 
    the one who was wearing a ring of gold to throw it away, and he did so, and 
    no one touched it; when he cut down the palm trees of the Jews to annoy 
    them; when ‘Umar and ‘Ali burned down places in which alcohol was sold; when 
    ‘Umar burned the castle of Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqaas when he hid from the people 
    he had been put in charge of.  These cases are all saheeh and well known, 
    and it cannot be claimed that they have been abrogated. The one who says 
    that financial penalties have been abrogated and that this is general in 
    application has gone beyond the views of the imams in quoting and reaching 
    conclusions. Most of these issues are acceptable according to the madhhab of 
    Ahmad and others, and many of them are acceptable according to Maalik. The 
    fact that the Rightly-Guided Caliphs and the senior Sahaabah did these 
    things after the death of the Prophet  (peace and blessings of Allaah be 
    upon him) also shows that the claim that the ruling has been abrogated is 
    false. Those who say that it has been abrogated have no evidence from 
    Qur’aan or Sunnah or scholarly consensus to support their claims. End quote 
    from al-Turuq al-Hukamiyyah (p. 224). 

    According to the view that it is permissible to impose 
    financial penalties, it is not permissible to try to get out of paying this 
    fine, and the meal that was offered to the policeman is a haraam bribe, 
    because it was given to the policeman so that he would waive something that 
    he was obliged to pay. 

    As for the permissible bribe, that is the one that a person 
    is forced to give in order to ward off injustice from himself when he is 
    being wronged, and it can only be given in such cases. 

    See also the answer to question no.
    25758. 

    And Allaah knows best.