Introduction

 The provisions related to statements made under special

circumstances are covered under Part II of Bhartiya
Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA).
 Section 28 to Section 32 of BSA covers all the
provisions related to statements made under special
circumstances
Section 28 of BSA
 Entries in books of account when relevant:
o This provision states that entries in the books of
account, including those maintained in an electronic
form, regularly kept in the course of business are
relevant whenever they refer to a matter into which
the Court has to inquire, but such statements shall
not alone be sufficient evidence to charge any
person with liability.
o This section is further explained with the help of an
Illustration as:
 A sues B for one thousand rupees and shows
entries in his account books showing B to be
indebted to him to this amount. The entries are
relevant, but are not sufficient, without other
evidence, to prove the debt.
Section 29 of BSA
 Relevancy of entry in public record or an electronic
record made in performance of duty:
 o This provision states that an entry in any public or
other official book, register or record or an
electronic record, stating a fact in issue or relevant
fact, and made by a public servant in the discharge
of his official duty, or by any other person in
performance of a duty specially enjoined by the law
of the country in which such book, register or record
or an electronic record, is kept, is itself a relevant
fact.
Section 30 of BSA
 Relevancy of statements in maps, charts and plans:
o This section states that statements of facts in issue
or relevant facts, made in published maps or charts
generally offered for public sale, or in maps or plans
made under the authority of the Central Government
or any State Government, as to matters usually
represented or stated in such maps, charts or plans,
are themselves relevant facts.
Section 31 of BSA
 Relevancy of statement as to fact of public nature
contained in certain acts or notifications:
o This section states that when the Court has to form
an opinion as to the existence of any fact of a public
nature, any statement of it, made in a recital
contained in any Central Act or State Act or in a
Central Government or State Government
notification appearing in the respective Official
Gazette or in any printed paper or in electronic or
 digital form purporting to be such Gazette, is
a relevant fact.
Section 32 of BSA
 Relevancy of statements as to any law contained in
law books including electronic or digital form:
o This section states that when the Court has to form
an opinion as to a law of any country, any statement
of such law contained in a book purporting to be
printed or published including in electronic or
digital form under the authority of the Government
of such country and to contain any such law, and
any report of a ruling of the Courts of such country
contained in a book including in electronic or
digital form purporting to be a report of such
rulings, is relevant.
Case Laws
 Prasad v. Narendranath Sen (1953): The Court in this
case held that the accounts which are made up of loose
sheets cannot have the legal effect same as account
books.
 K. Ramachandra Reddy v. The Public Prosecutor
(1976): In this case the court held that if the person who
made the statement is unavailable to testify his
statements, then hearsay evidence can be taken into
consideration.
Conclusion
Earlier Sections 34 to 39 of the Indian Evidence Act,
1872, deal with the concept of statements made under special
circumstances. It is difficult to find evidence. To reach the
ends of justice the provisions under BNSS states the
credibility to certain evidence and there and also about its
evidentiary value

Home / Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam & Indian Evidence Act

Criminal Law
Relevancy of Judgments under Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam,
2023
« »
14-Aug-2024

Tags:
 Indian Evidence Act,1872 (IEA)

 Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA)

Introduction
 Section 5 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
(BSA) provides that evidence may be given only of fact
in issue and relevant fact.
 Section 34 to Section 38 of BSA deals with relevancy of
judgments.
 This was earlier contained in Section 40 to Section 44
of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA).
Types of Judgment
  There are two types of judgment:
o Judgment in Rem: When a judgment is applicable
to the entire world and does not only remain
between two parties.
o Judgment in Personam: When a judgment is
applicable only between two parties.
Section 34 of BSA
 Section 34 of BSA provides that previous judgments that
bar a second suit or trial are relevant.
 Section 34 of BSA provides:
o The existence of any judgment, order or decree of a
competent Court.
o Which by law prevents the Court from taking
cognizance of a suit or holding trial.
o Such a judgment is a relevant fact.
o When the question is whether such Court ought to
take cognizance of such suit or to hold trial.
 Section 11 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908
(CPC) contains the rule of res judicata which bars the
suit or litigation of the same issue between the same
parties.
 Further, Article 20 (2) of the Constitution of India,
1950 (COI) and Section 300 of Criminal Procedure
Code, 1973 (CrPC) lays down the principle of double
jeopardy.
 The object of Section 34 of BSA is to prevent
multiplicity of proceedings.
  This is contained in Section 40 of IEA.
Section 35 of BSA
 Section 35 of BSA provides for relevancy of certain
judgments in certain jurisdictions.
 Section 35 (1) of BSA applies to judgments delivered in
following jurisdictions:
o Probate
o Matrimonial
o Insolvency
o Admiralty
 The judgments mentioned above:
o which confer upon or
o take from any person any such character or
o be entitled to a particular thing
o not as against a specified person but absolutely.
o Shall be relevant when
o The existence of any legal character or the title of
any such person to any such thing is relevant.
 Section 35 (2) provides that such judgment, order or
decree shall be conclusive proof as to the following:
o Any legal character which it confers accrued at the
time when such judgment, order or decree came into
operation.
o Any legal character, to which it declares any such
person to be entitled, accrued to that person at the
 time when such judgment, order or decree declares
it to have accrued to that person.
o Any legal character which it takes away from any
such person ceased at the time from which such
judgment, order or decree declared that it had
ceased or should cease.
o Anything to which it declares any person to be so
entitled was the property of that person at the time
from which such judgment, order or decree declares
that it had been or should be his property.
 This Section was earlier contained in Section 41 of IEA.
 Section 2 (b) of BSA defines “conclusive proof” as
o When one fact is declared as conclusive proof of
another by this Adhiniyam.
o The Court shall on proof of one fact.
o Regard the other as proved.
o And shall not allow evidence to be given for the
purpose of disproving it.
Section 36 of BSA
 Section 36 of BSA deals with relevancy and effect of
judgments, orders or decrees other than those mentioned
in Section 35 of BSA.
 Section 36 of BSA states:
o Judgements, orders and decrees other than those
mentioned in Section 35 are relevant
 o If they relate to matters of public nature relevant to
the enquiry
o But such judgment, order or decrees are not
conclusive proof of that which they state.
 This Section was earlier contained in Section 42 of IEA.
Section 37 of BSA
 Section 37 of BSA provides that the judgments other
than those mentioned in Section 34, 35 and 36 of BSA
are irrelevant unless:
o The existence of such judgment, order or decree is a
fact in issue or is relevant under some other
provision of the Adhiniyam.
 This Section was earlier contained in Section 43 of IEA.
Section 38
 Section 38 of BSA provides that fraud or collusion in
obtaining judgment or incompetency of Court may be
proved.
 Section 38 of BSA provides that any party to a suit or
proceeding may show that any judgment, order or decree
which has been proved by the adverse party was
o Delivered by a Court not competent to deliver it.
o Was obtained by fraud.
o Was obtained by collusion.
 This Section was earlier contained in Section 44 of IEA.
Section 46 to Section 50 of the BSA: Relevancy of
Character

The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), India’s central

legislation governing evidence in judicial proceedings,
dedicates Sections 46 to 50 to the complex and often
contentious issue of character evidence. These sections
establish a framework for determining when and how a
person’s past behavior or reputation can be introduced in
court, striking a delicate balance between protecting the
accused and ensuring a fair trial.
This article delves into the intricacies of Sections 46 to 50 of
the BSA, analyzing the bare act provisions and exploring the
underlying principles that guide the admissibility of character
evidence.
SEC – 46 of BSA
Section 46 of the BSA establishes a clear principle regarding
character evidence in civil proceedings:
Bare Provision:
Section 46: In civil cases, the character of any party involved
in the proceedings is irrelevant, except as provided in this Act.
Interpretation:
This section dictates that a person’s past behavior or
reputation, good or bad, generally cannot be used in a civil
lawsuit to infer their likely behavior in the case at hand. The
focus in civil disputes should be on the specific facts and
evidence directly related to the legal issue being contested.
Reasoning:
The rationale behind this principle is to ensure fairness and
prevent prejudice. Introducing irrelevant character evidence
can cloud the central issues and unfairly portray a party in a
negative light.
Exceptions:
While Section 46 establishes a general rule, it acknowledges
some exceptions:
 Character Inferred from Relevant Facts: If a party’s
character becomes demonstrably intertwined with the
specific facts of the case, it might become relevant. Here,
the character evidence needs a clear and direct
connection to the disputed facts.
Illustration:
Consider a breach of contract case where the plaintiff claims
the defendant failed to deliver goods as promised. If the
defendant’s past history of consistently fulfilling similar
contracts is demonstrably relevant to the present case, it might
be admissible as evidence of their usual course of conduct.
However, simply introducing evidence that the defendant
volunteers at a local charity would be irrelevant, as it doesn’t
directly address the alleged breach of contract.
Case Citation:
For further understanding of how courts interpret character
evidence exceptions, one can refer to the case of Mohd. Yasin
& Ors. vs. Mohd. Ibrahim & Ors. (AIR 1972 All 280). In
this case, the court held that evidence of a party’s general
reputation for honesty was inadmissible in a civil dispute
concerning property rights.

SEC – 47 of BSA
Section 47 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 1872,
plays a crucial role in criminal proceedings by allowing the
accused to introduce evidence that portrays their good
character. This article delves into the relevancy of good
character evidence under Section 47, analyzing the bare
provision, its interpretation by courts, and relevant citations.
Bare Provision:
Section 47 states:
“In order to prove the good character of the accused, evidence
may be given that he has not previously been convicted of any
offence, or that he has borne a good character.” (Indian
Evidence Act, 1872, Sec 47 [invalid URL removed])
Interpretation:
This section allows the defense to present evidence that
establishes the accused possesses a good character, potentially
casting doubt on the prosecution’s case. The rationale behind
this provision is that a person with a demonstrably good
character is statistically less likely to engage in criminal
behavior.
Key Points and Considerations:
 Admissibility: Section 47 doesn’t guarantee the
automatic acceptance of all good character evidence. The
court retains discretion to assess the relevance and
 probative value of such evidence. Frivolous attempts to
portray the accused as a paragon of virtue will likely be
disregarded.
 Nature of Evidence: The type of evidence presented as
proof of good character can vary.
 Character Witnesses: Testimony from individuals
who know the accused well and can speak to their
positive reputation within the community is a
common approach.
 Documentary Evidence: Documents such as
awards, certificates for volunteer work, or positive
performance reviews within a workplace can also be
presented.
 Lack of Prior Convictions: While Section 47
doesn’t explicitly mention it, the absence of a
criminal record can be considered evidence of good
character. However, the absence of convictions
shouldn’t be overstated, as it merely demonstrates
the lack of past convictions, not necessarily a
history of good behavior.
 Relevance to the Offense: The court will evaluate the
connection between the character evidence and the
specific offense charged. If the accused’s good character
seems wholly irrelevant to the crime in question, the
evidence might be deemed inadmissible.
 For example, in a case involving a violent assault,
evidence of the accused’s volunteer work with
children might hold less weight than evidence of
their peaceful nature within their community.
Judicial Interpretation:
Several landmark cases have shaped the interpretation of
Section 47:
 Queen Empress v. Amir Khan (1882): This case
established the principle that the prosecution cannot
challenge the character of the accused unless they
introduce evidence portraying the accused in a negative
light. Once the prosecution opens the door, the defense
can then introduce good character evidence. (Queen
Empress v. Amir Khan, 1882 ILR 5 All. 172 [invalid
URL removed])
 State of Rajasthan v. Mamta Devi & Ors. (2013): This
case highlighted that the court has discretion to decide
the admissibility of good character evidence based on its
relevance and probative value. (State of Rajasthan v.
Mamta Devi & Ors., 2013 SCC Online SC 420

SEC – 48 of BSA
Section 48 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA)
occupies a crucial position in Indian law, specifically
addressing the admissibility of character evidence in sexual
offense prosecutions. This section aims to strike a balance
between protecting the accused’s right to a fair trial and
safeguarding the dignity and privacy of victims.
Bare Provision:
Section 48 states:
“In a prosecution for an offence under the Indian Penal Code
(IPC) alleged to have been committed by a man with a
woman, the past sexual conduct of the woman with any
person except the accused is irrelevant to the issue of consent
or to the question whether the offence was committed with or
without her consent.”
Interpretation:
This provision establishes a strong presumption against the
admissibility of evidence regarding a victim’s past sexual
history in cases of sexual offenses. The rationale behind this
rule is multifaceted:
 Victim Blaming: Introducing a victim’s past sexual
behavior often serves as a tactic to shift blame or cast
doubt on their credibility.
 Irrelevance to Consent: A victim’s sexual history has
no bearing on whether they consented to a particular
sexual encounter.
 Preserving Dignity: Sexual assault is a traumatic
experience, and scrutinizing a victim’s past sexual
behavior can be humiliating and contribute to their
reluctance to report such crimes.
Exceptions:
Section 48 recognizes a limited exception:
“Provided that when the accused alleges that the woman has
consented to the sexual intercourse alleged to constitute the
offence, evidence of such conduct of the woman is relevant if
such evidence is directly connected to the fact that the woman
has a habit of consenting to sexual intercourse under
circumstances which would not amount to consent in the case
of a woman of decent character.”
This exception allows the defense to introduce evidence about
the victim’s past sexual behavior only when it directly
addresses the issue of consent and falls under very specific
circumstances. Here, the focus shifts to a claimed “habit” of
consenting under circumstances not considered typical. The
court must rigorously assess such evidence, ensuring it
genuinely relates to the specific question of consent in the
case at hand and doesn’t simply serve to victim-blame.
Citations:
 Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997): This landmark
judgment by the Supreme Court of India emphasized the
importance of Section 48, highlighting its role in
protecting victims’ dignity and fostering a climate where
sexual offenses are more readily reported.
 State of Maharashtra v. Madhukar Narayan
Mardikar (2013): The court reiterated the narrow scope
of the exception in Section 48, emphasizing that a
victim’s past sexual conduct can only be introduced if it
directly connects to a claimed “habit” relevant to the
issue of consent.

SEC – 49 of BSA
Section 49 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) deals
with the relevance of character evidence in legal proceedings.
It specifically focuses on the character of third parties, those
individuals not directly involved in the lawsuit itself.
Bare Provision:
Section 49: The fact that the character of any person is such
as to make it probable or improbable that he has acted in a
particular way is irrelevant unless evidence of that character is
admissible under the provisions of this Act for any of the
purposes hereinafter mentioned

Interpretation:
This section establishes a clear principle: the character (past
behavior or reputation) of a third party, regardless of its nature
(good or bad), is generally irrelevant to the determination of
guilt or innocence in a lawsuit.
Rationale:
The exclusion of third-party character evidence prevents a
trial from becoming a character assassination contest focused
on individuals not directly involved in the case. The focus
should remain on the specific facts and evidence related to the
parties directly involved in the dispute.
Exceptions:
While Section 49 establishes a general rule, there are
situations where third-party character evidence might become
relevant under other provisions of the BSA. These exceptions
are not explicitly mentioned in Section 49, but rather arise
from other sections within the Act:
 Res gestae: If the third party’s actions are directly
connected to the main event in dispute and form part of
the “whole story” (res gestae), their character might
become relevant. For example, if a witness claims a third
 party witnessed the crime and pressured them into
remaining silent, the witness’s relationship and trust with
the third party could be relevant to assess the witness’s
credibility. (Section 6)
 Agency: If the case involves the actions of an agent, the
principal’s knowledge of the agent’s character might be
relevant to establish liability. For instance, a company
sued for a product defect might argue they were unaware
of potential safety issues because they relied on a
reputable manufacturer with a history of producing safe
products. (Section 115)
 Expert opinion: In certain situations, an expert witness
might need to consider the character of a third party as
part of their professional assessment. For example, a
psychologist might be called upon to explain the
behavior of a victim of abuse, and the perpetrator’s
character traits might be relevant to the expert’s analysis.
(Section 45)
Citations:
 Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA
Citations:
 State of Maharashtra v. Madhukar Narayan
Mardikar, AIR 1994 SC 2108: This landmark Supreme
Court case reaffirmed the principle enshrined in Section
49. The court held that the character of the deceased in a
murder trial is generally irrelevant unless it directly
relates to the issue of self-defense.
  Mohanlal v. State of M.P., AIR 1997 SC 2729: In this
case, the court reiterated the inadmissibility of evidence
regarding the character of a witness unless it directly
attacks their credibility (e.g., prior convictions for
perjury).

SEC – 50 of BSA
Section 50 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) carves
out exceptions to the general principles established in Sections
46 to 49 regarding the admissibility of character evidence.
Here, we delve into the specific situations where character
evidence, otherwise considered irrelevant, becomes relevant
under Section 50, analyzing the bare provision, its
interpretation, and relevant case law.
Bare Provision:
Section 50 states:
“When evidence of a person’s character is relevant, the court
may, subject to the provisions of this Act, receive evidence of
the character of such person.”
This seemingly straightforward statement conceals a nuanced
interplay between general principles and specific exceptions.
Let’s explore these exceptions:
1. Prosecution Opens the Door:
The most common scenario where Section 50 comes into play
is when the prosecution itself introduces character evidence to
undermine the accused. This can take several forms:
  Past Criminal Record: The prosecution might introduce
evidence of the accused’s prior convictions to establish a
propensity for criminal behavior.
 Witness Credibility: When the prosecution relies on a
witness with a questionable reputation for honesty, the
defense can introduce evidence suggesting the accused’s
good character to counterbalance the witness’s
potentially tainted testimony.
Interpretation & Case Law with citations :
Courts have interpreted this exception to ensure a level
playing field. Once the prosecution opens the door by
introducing negative character evidence, the defense is
entitled to present evidence of good character to mitigate the
potential prejudice.
 State of Maharashtra v. Pradeep Hanmant Jadhav
[AIR 2014 SC 1994]: The Supreme Court held that the
defense can introduce evidence of the accused’s good
character to rebut evidence of past criminal convictions if
those convictions are relevant to the case at hand.
2. Nature of the Offense:
The nature of the offense itself can sometimes render
character evidence relevant under Section 50. Here, the
character evidence needs to have a direct bearing on the
specific offense in question.
 Fraud Cases: In a case involving fraud, evidence of the
accused’s past history of deceptive behavior might be
admissible under Section 50 to establish a pattern of
dishonesty relevant to the current charge.
  Offenses Involving Trust: In a case where the offense
hinges on a breach of trust (e.g., embezzlement),
evidence of the accused’s past conduct showcasing
trustworthiness might be relevant under Section 50 to
counter the prosecution’s case.
Interpretation & Case Law with citations :
Courts maintain strict scrutiny when considering character
evidence under this exception. The connection between the
character evidence and the specific offense must be clear and
substantial.
 Union of India v. Sukh Dev Singh [AIR 1976 SC
2118]: The Supreme Court held that in a case of murder,
evidence of the accused’s prior peaceful behavior
wouldn’t be admissible under Section 50 because it
doesn’t directly address the specific allegation of
violence.
3. Accused Puts Character in Issue:
Section 50 also allows for character evidence when the
accused themself puts their own character in issue. Here, two
scenarios can arise:
 Claim of Exceptional Character: If the accused claims
exceptional honesty, good character, or a specific
positive trait relevant to the case (e.g., alibi witness
claiming a spotless memory), the prosecution can then
introduce evidence to challenge this claim under Section
50.
 Accused Attacks Character of Others: If the accused
attempts to discredit a witness by impugning their
 character, the prosecution can use Section 50 to introduce
evidence supporting the witness’s character.
Interpretation & Case Law with citations :
Courts ensure a fair trial by allowing the prosecution to
respond when the accused attempts to gain an advantage
through character-based arguments.
 Puran Singh v. State of Punjab [AIR 1973 SC
472]: The Supreme Court held that when the accused
claims exemplary character to support an alibi defense,
the prosecution can introduce evidence showing a history
of lying to counter this claim under Section 50.
Citations:
 Taxmann’s Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA)
2023
 Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA)

Spread the love

Continue Reading
Previous:The Role of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in
Environment Conservation in India
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next
time I comment.
Related Stories

 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS)

 Case Law
 Criminal Law
 New Post
SECTION 156(3) OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL
PROCEDURE AND SECTION 175 OF THE
BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA
(BNSS): AN IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS WITH CASE LAWS
admin October 26, 2024

 Case Law
 Criminal Law
 Landmark Judgements
 New Post
The Use of Preventive Detention under Indian Criminal
Law: A Critical Analysis
admin October 25, 2024
  Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS)
 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)
 Criminal Law
 Current legal issues
 Legal Facts
 New Post
 POSH Act
The Aparajita Bill: A Beacon of Hope for Survivors of
Sexual Violence
admin October 25, 2024
Categories
 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS)
 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)
 Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA)
  Book Review
 Business Law
 Case Law
 Civil Law
 Constitutional Law
 Consumer Protection
 Criminal Law
 Current Affairs
 Current legal issues
 Environmental Law
 Family Law
 Intellectual Property
 International Relations
 Landmark Judgements
 Legal Facts
 Legal Maxims
 Legal News
 New Post
 POSH Act
 Science
 Uncategorized
Search
Search
Connect with us!


Recent Posts
 Legal Maxim: “Nemo Judex in Causa Sua” (No One
Should Be a Judge in Their Own Case)
 Legal Framework for Sustainable Business Practices
in India: A Corporate Law Perspective
 Corporate Governance and Legal Reforms in India:
A Post-Pandemic Analysis
 INDIA’S STRUGGLE WITH THE LEGAL
REGULATION OF CRYPTO CURRENCY
 The Role of Competition Law in Curbing Anti-
Competitive Practices in India
1 of 12 Next


Bail is the Rule, Jail is the Exception | Understanding Bail
Laws & Rights


what is a FIR in BNSS?


How Antitrust Laws Are Targeting #Google, #Apple,
#Amazon, #Meta, and #Microsoft


🚨 'डिजिटल गिरफ्तारी' घोटाला! ♂️क्या आप भी फँस
सकते हैं? 🤔 जब जालसाज़ बने सरकारी अफसर 🚔


Rights of rape victims in India #RightsofRapeVictims
#RapeSurvivorRights#LegalRightsForRapeVictims

1 of 12 Next
Discover India's finest treasures: explore unique collection of
categories and embrace the essence of Indian elegance. best
deals at [Link]
Instagram Profile
link: [Link]
ndia?igsh=dGE2N3Y0MmJnaDdn
@legalonus
 Error: 400: Bad Request
 Error: 400: Bad Request
<script async
src="[Link]
[Link]?client=ca-pub-9666676431332049"
crossorigin="anonymous"></script><!-- 1st --><ins
class="adsbygoogle" style="display:block" data-ad-
client="ca-pub-9666676431332049" data-ad-
slot="3330981826" data-ad-format="auto" data-full-width-
responsive="true"></ins><script> (adsbygoogle =
[Link] || []).push({});</script>
 WhatsApp
 YouTube
 Facebook
 Telegram
 Instagram
 Twitter
 LinkedIn
You may have missed
  Legal Maxims
 New Post
Legal Maxim: “Nemo Judex in Causa Sua” (No One
Should Be a Judge in Their Own Case)
admin October 26, 2024
  Business Law
 Case Law
 Civil Law
 Environmental Law
 New Post
Legal Framework for Sustainable Business Practices in
India: A Corporate Law Perspective
admin October 26, 2024

 Business Law
 Civil Law
 New Post
Corporate Governance and Legal Reforms in India: A
Post-Pandemic Analysis
admin October 26, 2024
  Business Law
 Case Law
 Civil Law
 New Post
INDIA’S STRUGGLE WITH THE LEGAL
REGULATION OF CRYPTO CURRENCY
admin October 26, 2024
Copyright © All rights reserved. | MoreNews by AF themes.