report. Accordingly, Thiru.Jayaraman[PW-6] measured the wall and instructed PW-2 to raise the height of the wall by putting two more rows of bricks and came back and reported the same about this to the accused Thiru.V.Srinivasan. At that point of time, there was demand of illegal gratification of Rs.4,000/- by the accused and after bargaining, the same was settled at Rs.8,250/- inclusive of deposit Rs.6,200/- and application fee of Rs.50/-. In the complaint, it is also stated about the second demand on 04.06.2011, the third demand on 17.06.2011 and the 4th demand on 20.06.2011. In the chief examination he has almost reiterated what he has said in his complaint regarding the demands made by the accused prior to the trap proceedings. The trial Court taking note of the U turn taken by this witness in the cross examination denying the allegation of demand made by the accused on all these occasions, has considered this witness as wholly unreliable witness. To take portion of deposition of PW-2, which is in support of prosecution, the said portion must be well corroborated by the other witnesses. As far as this case is concerned, for the alleged demands made prior to the trap, there is no other witness except the sole evidence of PW-2, who has become a tainted witness due to his hostility during the cross examination.
