Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Official Citation: 2025 LHC 1512
Court / Jurisdiction: Lahore High Court
Year of Decision: 2024
Decision Date: 2024-12-31
Parties: The State, Muhammad Jehangir vs Muhammad Jehangir, The State and JUDGMENT
Ruling Summary: This decision was rendered by the Lahore High Court on 2024-12-31, officially reported as 2025 LHC 1512. In this matter between The State, Muhammad Jehangir and Muhammad Jehangir, The State and JUDGMENT, the court adjudicated key questions of statutory construction, procedural regularity, and legal precedent under Pakistani law.
Core Holding: The honorable bench evaluated governing statutory provisions and judicial authorities to establish the rights of the parties, delivering the binding reasoning set out below.
Case cited as 2025LHC1512
Court Name: Lahore High Court Judge(s): Sadiq Mahmud Khurram, Sultan Tanvir Ahmad Title:The State, Muhammad Jehangir vs Muhammad Jehangir, The State and
JUDGMENT
Reported As: 2025 LHC 1512 Result: Capital Sentence Answered in Negative Judgment
JUDGMENT SADIQ MAHMUD KHURRAM, J.- Muhammad Jehangir son of Malik Ahmad Hussain (convict) was tried by the learned Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court No.1, Rawalpindi Division, Rawalpindi in the case instituted upon the private complaint titled "Zabit Khan Vs. Muhammad Jehangir" (relating to F.I.R. No. 103 of 2019 dated 23.07.2019 registered at Police Station Bahtar, District Attock) in respect of offences under sections 302 and 34 P.P.C. and under section 7 (a) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 for committing the Qatl-i-Amd of Amjad Ali Khan son of Jahandad (deceased), Yasir son of Moazzam Khan (deceased) and Muhammad Rafique (deceased). The learned trial court vide judgment dated 16.03.2021 convicted Muhammad Jehangir son of Malik Ahmad Hussain (convict) and sentenced him as infra: Muhammad Jehangir son of Malik Ahmad Hussain :- Death on three counts under section 302(b) P.P.C. as Tazir for committing Qatl-i-Amd of Amjad Ali Khan son of Jahandad (deceased), Yasir son of Moazzam Khan (deceased) and Muhammad Rafique (deceased) and directed to pay Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. to the legal heirs of each of the three deceased and in case of failure to pay compensation, to further undergo simple imprisonment of six months. The convict was ordered to be hanged by his neck till death. The convict, was however acquitted of the charge under section 7 (a) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 by the learned trial court.
---
## Page 2
2. Feeling aggrieved, Muhammad Jehangir son of Malik Ahmad Hussain (convict) lodged the Criminal appeal No.289 of 2021, assailing his conviction and sentence. The learned trial court submitted Reference under section 374 Cr.P.C. read with section 30(2) of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, which has been numbered as Capital Sentence Reference No. 6/T of 2021, for confirmation or otherwise of the sentences of death awarded to Muhammad Jehangir son of Malik Ahmad Hussain (convict). We intend to dispose of the Criminal Appeal No.289 of 2021 and the Capital Sentence Reference No. 06/T of 2021 through this single judgment. 3. Precisely, the necessary facts of the prosecution case, as stated by Zabit Khan (PW-5), the complainant of the case, are as under:- "I am resident of Dhraik. Cultivator by profession. My father Jahan Dad moved an application for demarcation bearing Khasra No. 1428. On 23.07.2019, at about 11:00 am Naib Tehsildar Nazar, Ch. Muhammad Rafique Girdawar, Tahir Mehmood Patwari, Yasir Naib Qasid arrived at the place of occurrence for demarcation of above mentioned Khasra. From our side, I alongwith my brother Amjad Khan deceased, Liaqat s/o Muhammad Daood who was owner of adjacent land was also present there. Jahangir Khan accused present in the court alongwith his brother Noor Muhammad armed with weapons also reached at the spot. They tried to stop the demarcation process. I and my brother were bent upon to carry the proceedings of demarcation. Nazar Muhammad Naib Tehsildar and Ch. Rafique Girdawar asked them not to interfere in the process of demarcation but Jahangir and Noor Muhammad reluctant to do so. During this process Jahangir and Noor Muhammad started abusing us. The accused Jahangir Khan made two fires with 9 MM pistol upon my brother Amjad Khan which landed on right side of his neck and right side of his belly and Noor Muhammad (since died) also fired upon my brother Amjad Khan which hit on his right side of his ribs and navel and Amjad deceased fell down. Muhammad Rafique Girdawar ran towards south, Jahangir accused (present in the court) and Noor Muhammad deceased chased him and Jahangir accused fired twice on Rafique Girdawar which hit on his back and right under arm and the accused Noor Muhammad since died also fired twice upon Muhammad Rafique Girdawar which hit on left side of his hip and right side of his leg, he also fell down. Yasir Naib Qasid also ran towards west side to save his life but Noor Muhammad chased him and fired upon him which hit upon his chest. I alongwith Nazar Naib Tehsildar, Liaqat Mehmood and Tahir Patwari took shelter behind the Vehicle. Both Jahangir and Noor Muhammad ran towards graveyard. After few minutes we heard sound of fires from graveyard side. Later on it came to my knowledge that Noor Muhammad was killed. We took injured Amjad Khan, Ch. Muhammad Rafique Girdawar and Yasir to Bahtar hospital but in the way all the three injured succumbed to the injuries. The police after receiving the information reached at hospital and recorded the statement of Ch. Nazar Naib Tehsildar upon which the FIR No. 103/19 was registered in PS Bahtar. The deceased Muhammad Rafique Girdawar, Yasir Naib Qasid, Nazar Muhammad Tehsildar and Tahir Patwari came on official duty for demarcation. Due to this naked aggression and act of Jahangir and Noor Muhammad (since dead) the terror and fear spread in the area/vicinity. The police came at the spot and collected blood from the earth through cotton from the place of murder of Muhammad Rafique Girdawar, Naib Qasid Yasir and my brother Amjad vide recovery memo Exh.PA, Exh.PB & Exh.PC respectively also made three parcels and sealed with stamp AK. All the memos were attested by me and Azam. The police also took intopossession three empties of 9 MM P-1/1-3 from the place of murder of Amjad and sealed into parcel and took into possession through recovery memo Exh.PD. The police also took into possession three empties of 9 MM P-2/1-3 from the place of murder of Muhammad Rafique girdawar and sealed into parcel and took into possession through recovery memo Exh.PE. The police also took into possession one empty of 9 MM P-3 from the place of murder of Yasir and sealed into parcel and took into possession through recovery memo Exh.PF. All the three parcels were stamped with AK, attested by me and Azam Khan.
---
## Page 3
On 18.10.2019, 1 alongwith Khawar Haroon s/o Muazam Khan r/o Langar went to the PS for inquiring about the progress of murder of my brother, Rafique Girdawar and Yasir Naib Qasid where the police/Muhammad Naseer Inspector interrogating Muhammad Jahangir accused, he made disclosure that he can get recovered the pistol 9MM from the deserted house situated at village Langar owned by Asad Khan s/o Mumtaz Khan where he has concealed the 9 MM pistol. On his disclosure, the police alongwith me and Khawar Haroon and the accused Muhammad Jahangir (present in the court) went to the village Langar. When the police reached near the house of one Arshad Khan, the accused asked the police to stop the vehicle where all the above mentioned persons alighted from the vehicle and went to the deserted house of Asad Khan through Pakdandi and the accused Muhammad Jahangir got recovered the pistol P-4 from north east corner after removing the small stones which was wrapped into plastic bag light green colour and after unloading 05 live cartridges P-5/1-5 were present in the magazine. The police took into possession the pistol 09 MM alongwith five rounds and magazine after preparing the parcel and stamped with MN in our presence vide recovery memo Exh.PG attested by me and Khawar Haroon. The 1.0 recorded my statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. I filed the complaint due to the conduct and mala-fide of the 1.0 Asif and SHO Mazhar Shah who malafidly and with ulterior motive after receiving heavy bribe from the accused party, twisted the material facts to give undue advantage to the present accused, he tried to save the accused Muhammad Jahangir by putting all the burden of the murders upon Noor Muhammad (since died). The police also adopted illegal procedure by asking us to give oath upon Quran and Talaq which is alien to law. We also moved application to highups in this regard but in vain then I filed the complaint Exh.PH which bears my signature i.e Exh.PH/1." 4. The accused was summoned to face trial in the case instituted upon the private complaint titled "Zabit Khan Vs. Muhammad Jehangir" (relating to F.I.R. No. 103 of 2019 dated 23.07.2019 registered at Police Station Bahtar, District Attock) in respect of offences under sections 302 and 34 P.P.C. and under section 7 (a) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 for committing the Qatl-i-Amd of Amjad Ali Khan son of Jahandad (deceased), Yasir son of Moazzam Khan (deceased) and Muhammad Rafique (deceased). The learned trial court framed the charge against the accused on 01.09.2020, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 5. The complainant of the case in order to prove his case got recorded statements of as many as seven witnesses. The ocular account of the case was furnished by Zabit Khan (PW-5) Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) and Nazar Muhammad (PW-7). Muhammad Saleem (PW-1), Kausar Hussain (PW-2) and Adil Shahzad (PW-3) stated that on 23.07.2019, they identified the dead bodies of the deceased at the time of post mortem examinations. 6. The learned trial court recorded statements of thirteen witnesses as Court witnesses. Asad Mahmood HC (CW-3) stated that on 18.10.2019, Muhammad Naseer, Inspector (CW-12) handed over to him a sealed parcel said to contain a pistol and on 22.10.2019, he handed over the said sealed parcel to the Investigating Officer of the case for its onward transmission to the office of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency, Lahore. Ahmad Faheem Zafar, ASI (CW-4) stated that on 23.07.2019, he got recorded the formal F.I.R. (Exh.CW-4/A). Sajid Mahmood 564/C (CW-6) stated that on 23.07.2019, he escorted the dead bodies of the deceased to the hospital and received the last worn clothes of the deceased from the Medical Officer after the post mortem examinations of the dead bodies of the deceased. Muhammad Irfan, SI (CW-2) investigated the case from 24.09.2019 till 03.10.2019, arrested the appellant on 02.10.2019 and narrated the facts of the investigation conducted by him in his statement recorded by the learned trial court. Muhammad Naseer, Inspector (CW-12) investigated the case from 04.10.2019 till 06.12.2019 and narrated the facts of the investigation conducted by him in his statement recorded by the learned trial court. Muhammad Asif Khan, SI (CW-13) investigated the case from 23.07.2019 till 18.09.2019 and narrated
---
## Page 4
the facts of the investigation conducted by him in his statement recorded by the learned trial court. 6. The learned trial court also recorded the statement of Dr. Fahad Abid (CW 7), who on 23.07.2019 was posted as Medical Officer at THQ hospital Fateh Jhang and on the same day conducted the post-mortem examination of the dead body of the deceased, namely Muhammad Rafique. Dr. Fahad Abid (CW-7) on examining the dead body of the deceased namely Muhammad Rafique, observed as under:- " Description of injuries: Injury No. 1. A firearm lacerated wound 01x0.8 cm on right Anterior axillary line, 12 cm from right nipple, margins everted, so it is exit wound. Injury No. 2: A firearm lacerated wound on left lumber region 01x0.6 cm on back, it is 08 cm from vertebral line and 23 cm from left anterior superior iliac spine towards posteriorly, margins are inverted, so it is entry wound. Injury No. 3: A lacerated wound of measuring 01x0.6 cm on left inferior lateral quadrant of buttock which is 28 cm from left anterior superior iliac spine, wound is inverted so it is entry wound. Injury No. 4: A lacerated wound of measuring 01x1.2 cm on left anterior aspect of thigh, 35 cm from left anterior superior iliac spine, margins are elevated, so it is exit wound. Injury No. 5: Suspected clinical fracture of left femur. Injury No. 6: A laceration of 08x03 cm on left leg laterally, which is 13 cm inferior from right knee patella lower border. Opinion: In my opinion, deceased died due to severe hemorrhage shock caused by firearm injury No. 1 & 2. Due to severe hemorrhage shock and leads to develop cardio pulmonary arrest. All injuries were anti mortal in nature while injuries No. 1 & 2 were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature." On 23.07.2019, Dr. Fahad Abid (CW-7) also conducted the post-mortem examination of the dead body of the deceased, namely Amjad Ali Khan son of Jahandad Khan. Dr. Fahad Abid (CW-7) on examining the dead body of the deceased namely Amjad Ali Khan son of Jahandad Khan, observed as under:- "Injury No. 1: A lacerated wound of 01x0.5 cm from suprasternal notched, 03 cm towards right, inferiorly on second rib, inverted margins, so entry wound. Injury No. 2: A laceration of 1.2x0.8 cm on posterior axillary line, just at the angle of arm and body, margins are elevated, so it is exit wound. Injury No. 3: 0.9x0.5 cm wound of laceration, 7.5 cm inferio-medial from right nipple, margins inverted, so it is entry wound. Injury No. 4: A lacerated wound of 01x0.5 cm, margins inverted, entry wound, 08 cm from naval towards left superior lateral side. Injury No. 5: A lacerated wound of 1.2x0.9 cm margins elevated, exit wound, 03 cm from mid vertebral line on right lateral. Injury No. 6: A lacerated wound of 01x0.3 cm on right inguinal region, inverted margins, margins inverted, so entry wound, 17 cm from naval inferiorly on right side. Injury No. 7: A lacerated wound of 1.5x 1.3 cm, margins elevated on superior-lateral gluteal region on right side, 7.5 cm from para-vertebral line. Injury No. 8: A lacerated wound of 1.5x0.7 cm, on left thigh, letero-posterior aspect, margins inverted so entry wound, it is 19 cm superior from left patella. Injury No. 9: A lacerated wound of 2.3x0.9 cm margins Delevated, so exit wound, 03 cm superio lateral from left knee patella. Opinion:
---
## Page 5
In my opinion, deceased died due to hemorrhage shock caused by firearm injury No. 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5. Hemorrhage leads to develop cardio pulmonary arrest. All injuries were anti mortal in nature while injuries No. 1, 2 & 3 were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature." On 23.07.2019 Dr. Fahad Abid (CW-7) also conducted the post-mortem examination of the dead body of the deceased, namely Yasir son of Moazzam Khan. Dr. Fahad Abid (CW-7) on examining the dead body of the deceased namely Yasir son of Moazzam Khan, observed as under:- "Injury No. 1: A lacerated wound of 01x0.5 cm on left side of chest, 07 cm from sterna notch inferiorly, margins inverted, so it is entry wound. Injury No. 2: A laceration of 1.5x02 cm on left posterior axillary line, 18 cm from left acromial process inferiorly, margins elevated, so it is exit wound. Opinion: In my opinion, deceased died due to severe hemorrhage shock caused by firearm injury No. 1 & 2. Severe hemorrhage shock leads to damage of cardio pulmonary circulation and leads to cardio pulmonary arrest. All injuries were anti mortal in nature while injuries No. 1 & 2 were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature." 8. On 05.09.2020, the learned counsel for the complainant gave up the witnesses namely Khawar Haroon and Muhammad Dawood as being unnecessary. On 23.12.2020, the learned counsel for the complainant gave up the witnesses namely Muhammad Tufail, Waqas Ali and Ijaz Hussain as being unnecessary. On 15.02.2021, the learned counsel for the complainant gave up the witnesses namely Liaquat Ali and Muhammad Azam as being unnecessary, tendered in evidence the reports of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency, Lahore (Exh.PN/1-2, Exh.PO/1-2, Exh.PP, Exh.PQ, Exh.PR/1-2 and Exh.PS), and closed the prosecution evidence. 9. After the closure of prosecution evidence, the learned trial court examined the appellant namely Muhammad Jehangir son of Malik Ahmad Hussain under section 342 Cr.P.C. and in answer to the question why this case against you and why the PWs have deposed against you, he replied that he had been involved in the case falsely and was innocent. The appellant namely Muhammad Jehangir son of Malik Ahmad Hussain opted not to get himself examined under section 340(2) Cr.P.C. and did not adduce any evidence in his defence. 10. On the conclusion of the trial, the learned Judge, Anti Terrorism Court No.1, Rawalpindi Division, Rawalpindi convicted and sentenced the appellant as referred to above. 11. The primary contention of the learned counsel for the appellant was that the whole case was fabricated and false. The learned counsel for the appellant argued that the prosecution remained unable to prove the facts in issue and did not produce any unimpeachable, admissible and relevant evidence to prove the same. The learned counsel for the appellant further contended that the statements of the eye witnesses namely Zabit Khan (PW-5), Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) and Nazar Muhammad (PW7) were not worthy of any reliance. The learned counsel for the appellant also argued that nothing incriminating was recovered from the appellant during the investigation of the case. The learned counsel for the appellant finally submitted that the prosecution had totally failed to prove the case against the appellant beyond the shadow of doubt. 12. On the other hand, the learned Deputy Prosecutor General and the learned counsel for the complainant contended that the prosecution had proved its case beyond shadow of doubt by producing independent witnesses. The learned Deputy Prosecutor General and the learned counsel for the complainant further argued that the deceased were murdered by the appellant and reliance could be placed on the statements of the prosecution witnesses namely Zabit Khan (PW- 5) Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) and Nazar Muhammad (PW-7) as they had proved to be truthfulness witnesses. The learned Deputy Prosecutor General and the learned counsel for the complainant contended that there was no occasion for the prosecution witnesses, who were related to the deceased, to substitute the real offender with the innocent in this case. The learned Deputy
---
## Page 6
Prosecutor General and the learned counsel for the complainant prayed for the rejection of the appeal as lodged by the appellant namely Muhammad Jehangir son of Malik Ahmad Hussain. 13. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned Deputy Prosecutor General, the learned counsel for the complainant and with their assistance carefully perused the record and evidence recorded during the trial. 14. The whole prosecution case revolves around the statements of the prosecution witnesses namely Zabit Khan (PW-5) Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) and Nazar Muhammad (PW-7). The prosecution witnesses namely Zabit Khan (PW-5) Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) and Nazar Muhammad (PW-7) explained their presence at the place of occurrence, at the time of occurrence with consistency. We have also noted that the prosecution witnesses namely Zabit Khan (PW-5) Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) and Nazar Muhammad (PW-7), in a very natural and forthright manner, narrated the occurrence and gave each and every detail of the same. It is also a fact that on the day of occurrence, the prosecution witness namely Nazar Muhammad (PW-7) was performing his duties as a Naib Tehsildar whereas the prosecution witness namely Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) was performing his duties as a Patwari and Muhammad Rafique (deceased) was performing his duties as a Girdawar, whereas Yasir (deceased) was performing his duties as a Naib Qasid and it was in the performance of their duties that the prosecution witnesses namely Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) and Nazar Muhammad (PW-7) and Muhammad Rafique Girdawar (deceased) and Yasir, Naib Qasid (deceased) were present at the place of occurrence, at the time of occurrence. In this state of things when the prosecution witnesses namely Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) and Nazar Muhammad (PW-7) provably had no enmity with the appellant to involve him in the occurrence without any reason, then the prosecution witnesses namely Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) and Nazar Muhammad (PW-7) can be considered as independent witnesses. Furthermore, during the course of cross- examination of the prosecution witnesses namely Zabit Khan (PW-5) Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) and Nazar Muhammad (PW-7), the sequence of the arrival of the prosecution witnesses at the place of occurrence was explored in great detail and all the facts necessary were brought on record to prove that the prosecution witnesses namely Zabit Khan (PW-5) Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) and Nazar Muhammad (PW-7) arrived at the place of occurrence and also witnessed the same. It was explained by the prosecution witnesses namely Zabit Khan (PW-5) Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) and Nazar Muhammad (PW-7) that an application had been submitted by Jahandad, father of Zabit Khan (PW-5), seeking the demarcation of Khasra No. 1428 and it was for the said purpose that the prosecution witness namely Nazar Muhammad (PW-7) Naib Tehsildar ,the prosecution witness namely Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) Patwari and Muhammad Rafique Girdawar (deceased) and Yasir, Naib Qasid (deceased) had arrived at the place of occurrence and were present there when the appellant and Noor Muhammad (since dead) launched an attack on the said persons gathered at the place of occurrence and committed the Qatl-i-Amd of Amjad Ali Khan (deceased), Muhammad Rafique Girdawar (deceased) and Yasir, Naib Qasid (deceased). During the course of cross-examination the prosecution witnesses namely Zabit Khan (PW-5) Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) and Nazar Muhammad (PW-7) were repeatedly questioned with regard to their departure to the place of occurrence and their arrival at the place of occurrence and the prosecution witnesses namely Zabit Khan (PW-5) Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) and Nazar Muhammad (PW-7) remained consistent with regard to the relevant facts. With regard to the arrival of prosecution witnesses namely Zabit Khan (PW-5) Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) and Nazar Muhammad (PW-7) at the place of occurrence and their reason for presence at the place of occurrence , Zabit Khan (PW-5) during cross-examination, explained as under:- "Naib Tehsildar, Rafique Girdawar and other revenue officers alongwith Naib Qasid arrived at the place of occurrence for the purpose of demarcation at 11:00 am. demarcation proceedings, the quarrel took place. When the revenue staff arrived, we were present in our own land. We were
---
## Page 7
standing in our land and when the revenue staff arrived there, we went towards them. They met us on the main passage/road. Without delay we all went to our land for demarcation. Within five minutes of the reaching of revenue staff, quarrel started. " Similarly, the prosecution witness namely Tahir Mahmood (PW-6), explained during cross- examination as under:- "I received summon 02/03 days prior to present occurrence regarding demarcation of the land. Jahandad the applicant of demarcation was known to me. During the days of occurrence he did not visit the Patwar Circle. We left Fateh Jang for the purpose of demarcation at about 10:00 am accompanying Naib Tehsildar, Girdawar and Yasir Naib Qasid. It was Girdawar who was driving the vehicle. We reached at the place of occurrence at about 10:45/11:00 am. When we reached at the spot, 09 persons were present there. We all soon our reaching went to the land of demarcation. ............. Khasra No. 1428 is 48 kanals 02 marlas owned by Jahandad s/o Feroz and Karam Khan s/o Muhammad Ayoub" (emphasis supplied) The prosecution witness namely Nazar Muhammad (PW-7) also explained during cross- examination, as under:- "It was Rafique Girdawar who took for demarcation to the land on his own vehicle. I, Rafique deceased, Yasir deceased and Tahif Patwari went to the land for demarcation together. We reached on that land at 10.30/10.45 A.M. None was present prior to our reaching at that place. 05/07 minutes of our reaching, Jahangir arrived at the spot, thereafter, on his telephone his brother Noor Muhammad arrived there. 07/08 other personals were also arrived at the spot at that time. Prior to attendance of the parties, the accused parties objected for demarcation. A house of Jahandad was also available in that land. The said house was almost available in the middle of that land bearing Khasra No. 1428. " Asif Khan, SI (CW-13), the Investigating Officer of the case, during his visit to the place of occurrence also took into possession the documents under the use of the witnesses and the deceased, further proving the reason for the presence of the witnesses and the deceased at the place of occurrence. Asif Khan, SI (CW-13), the Investigating Officer of the case, got recorded in his statement before the learned trial court as under:- "I also took into possession from spot field book P.6, Latha P.7, a cloth of white colour P.8, file of documents P.10/1-2 and took the same into possession vide recovery memo Exh.PK, attested by the PWs." This part of the statement of Asif Khan, SI (CW-13), the Investigating Officer of the case, was not even challenged. We have scrutinized the statements of the prosecution witnesses namely Zabit Khan (PW-5) Tahir Mahmood (PW-6) and Nazar Muhammad (PW-7)…
Read the unabridged text and precedent citation network on Al Wakeelo Legal Research Platform.