JUDGMENT Surinder Sarup, J.—This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, Kullu and Lauhal-Spiti Districts at Mandi dated 27/28th-1-1997 whereby the appellant Girja Devi @ Gita Devi has been convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. for committing the murder of her husband Shri Pal Chand. She has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default of which to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three years. Be it stated here that originally the appellant alongwith co-accused Tulsi Ram was sent up for trial under Section 302 read with Section 34, IPC. The said Tulsi Ram has been acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge, Mandi by giving him the benefit of doubt. 2. The case of the prosecution at the trial was that the appellant, whose name has been described in the record as Girja Devi @ Gita Devi, was married to one Pal Chand (since deceased). From this marriage, a son and a daughter were born. The son by the name of Chaman Lai (who deposed at the trial against his mother as PW-11), was living with the deceased i.e. his father in Village Chamanpur (Badsu) while the daughter was living with her maternal grand-parents. 3. According to the case of the prosecution, sometime in the month of October, 1993, at about 11.00 a.m., the appellant went to the real aunt of the deceased, namely, Padma Devi, who had gone to cut grass and had just returned to her house. After touching feet of Padma Devi and showing her due respect as an elder, the appellant remained sitting for a moment and thereafter told Padma Devi that her husband Pal Chand had not returned home the previous night. She requested Padma Devi for a search to be carried out for him. On this, both the appellant as well as Padma Devi went out in search of Pal Chand in the Nalla. They came to the temple of Baba nearby, but no trace could be found of Pal Chand anywhere. Although Padma Devi wanted to take her food being hungry, she was persuaded by the appellant to go towards the Nalla. It was there that Padma Devi found the dead body of Pal Chand lying at the spot. They came to the temple of Baba nearby, but no trace could be found of Pal Chand anywhere. Although Padma Devi wanted to take her food being hungry, she was persuaded by the appellant to go towards the Nalla. It was there that Padma Devi found the dead body of Pal Chand lying at the spot. During this time, the appellant instead of accompanying Padma Devi had gone in the opposite direction ostensibly in search of her husband. 4. Thereafter, as per the prosecution, the appellant went to Police Station Balh accompanied by Bhag Singh and lodged the report Ex.PW-14/A stating therein that her husband had been missing and also that his dead body with injuries had been found in the Nalla. Inspector Hans Raj (PW-14) visited the spot and noticed the dead body of Pal Chand having injuries on the chin, ears, throat, neck and testicles etc. The dead body was found by him lying at a distance of 151 feet away from the residence of the appellant and the deceased Pal Chand himself. PW-14 is also stated to have noticed skid marks on the Dhank (cliff) and the grass was trampled. Blood stains on the bushes were also noticed by him. On further spot inspection PW-14 found that there was a tap in the lower portion of the house of the appellant where he found blood clots in the drain beneath the said tap. His further inspection/search resulted in recovery of shreds of cloth lying under the stones in the vicinity, which were found to be blood stained. On a visit to the room of the deceased, PW-14 found blood stains on the rafters of the roof, cots and table lying there. 5. On a Ruka being sent by PW-14 for registration of a case, formal FIR Ex. PR was recorded at the Police Station under Section 302 read with Section 201, IPC. 6. During the course of investigation, photos Ex. P-9 to P-38 of the dead body were taken, the negatives of which are Ex. P-39. The Investigating Officer also prepared inquest report Ex. PA and took into possession blood stained stones from the spot where the dead body of Pal Chand was recovered. He further took into possession the blood stained earth etc. The shreds of the blood stained clothes of the deceased aforementioned were also taken into possession by him. P-39. The Investigating Officer also prepared inquest report Ex. PA and took into possession blood stained stones from the spot where the dead body of Pal Chand was recovered. He further took into possession the blood stained earth etc. The shreds of the blood stained clothes of the deceased aforementioned were also taken into possession by him. The Investigating Officer Hans Raj (PW-14) took into possession the blood stained cot and a folding bed, and a table found lying in the room of the deceased was also taken into possession by him. 7. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer preapred the site plan Ex. PW-14/C of the place where the dead body was found as also the site plan of the house of the appellant and the deceased. The appellant was formally arrested on 8.10.1993. During interrogation, she made disclosure statement Ex. PC dated 11.10.1993 in the Police Station in the presence of witnesses. In the said disclosure statement, she admitted having killed her husband Pal Chand with the help of weapons like Danda, Drat and Drati etc. which were kept hidden by her in her kitchen and which, as per her disclosure statement, she can get recovered. Additionally, she pointed out to the Investigating Officer, the spot of the said killing and the place where she had washed the dead body of her husband and also the place where it had been thrown into the Nalla. 8. According to the prosecution case, in pursuance of her above disclosure statement, the appellant got recovered Drat Ex. P-1 and Drati Ex. P-4 from her kitchen where they were lying beneath the wooden almirah. These two items were found to be blood stained and the Investigating Officer took the same into possession as also the blood stained Shirt Ex. P-41, Salwar Ex. P-42 which the appellant produced before him. Further, blood stained items were also recovered and taken into possession by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation. 9. The dead body of Pal Chand was sent for post-mortem examination which was done by Dr. S.S. Guleria (PW). The postmortem report in this behalf is Ex. PT. 10. After completing the investigation and submitting the challan in the court by the Investigating Officer, a charge under Section 302, IPC was framed against the appellant to which she pleaded not guilty and claimed a trial. S.S. Guleria (PW). The postmortem report in this behalf is Ex. PT. 10. After completing the investigation and submitting the challan in the court by the Investigating Officer, a charge under Section 302, IPC was framed against the appellant to which she pleaded not guilty and claimed a trial. During the same, while recording the statement of male child of the appellant from the deceased, namely, Chaman Lal, the name of Tulsi Ram also cropped up as co-accused involved in the murder of Pal Chand. It was in these circumstances that the said Tulsi Ram was impleaded as co-accused in the supplementary challan filed by the police after further investigation on the basis of which a fresh charge was framed against the appellant and the said Tulsi Ram under Section 302 read with Section 34, IPC. 11. At the trial, the prosecution examined as many as 14 witnesses, including the child witness Chaman Lal as PW-11, Dr. S.S. Guleria (PW-10) who conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Pal Chand and the Investigating Officer Inspector Hans Raj (PW-14). In addition, Shri Brij Mohan Sharma, S.P. Enforcement, Shimla also appeared as PW-15. 12. In his statement under Section 313, Cr.P.C, Tulsi Ram co-accused denied the prosecution allegations against him and took the plea of alibi. In this rarest of rare instances, the appellant/ Girja Devi alias Gita Devi admitted that she had killed her husband Pal Chand. In order to appreciate the plea that she took in her statement under Section 313, Cr.P.C., it would be appropriate as well as beneficial to reproduce that part of her statement verbatim, which is as follows: "My husband Pal Chand used to consume liquor and in the fit of intoxication, he used to beat me. He also used to beat his parents. On account of his behaviour, his sisters never visited him. His father had to leave the house and resided with his daughters and also in the Asharam. Pal Chand always remained drunk during day and night. He also used to give beating to me. When he returned to the house at 11.00 p.m. during the night, he shouted at the door to open the door. He was drunk at that time. Immediately on entering inside, he gave kicks to me and I fell down, then I got up. I brought food for him. He also used to give beating to me. When he returned to the house at 11.00 p.m. during the night, he shouted at the door to open the door. He was drunk at that time. Immediately on entering inside, he gave kicks to me and I fell down, then I got up. I brought food for him. He did not take food and also did not allow me to take food and I was denuded by Him. (The accused has requested to reveal important things by excluding public audience. She is allowed. Public (audience) excluded from the court and statement to continue). He had the sex in natural course with me then he performed sex with un-natural course then he gave beating to me. Thereafter, he directed me to put his organ into mouth. I refused. Again, he insisted upon to do, lest I would be killed alongwith my son Chaman Lal. He tried to put his organ forcibly in my mouth and took Darat7 in his hands and threatened to kill. I was able to get hold of sickle as I was too much afraid of and then I hit his private part with the sickle. He fell down and thereafter, I hit him whatever came in my hands and went on hitting with that. Chaman Lal my son also got up when he denuded me and I told Chaman Lal not to tell this fact to any one that I had killed his father. I carried the dead body and put him near Nala where it was found. Earlier whenever my husband used to give beatings I used to take shelter in the house of Padma Devi and Bhag Singh and I had been telling them about the maltreatment. They used to tell if Pal Chand beats me, she should retard. Once he put the house on fire, he gave beatings to his father as he was demanding money from him. Whenever, I used to leave him and come to parental house then Bhag Singh and my husband Pal Chand used to call me back. My daughter is aged about 3 years and she has been kept in the house of my parents." 13. In her defence, the appellant examined DW-1 Dr. R.D. Anand, DW-2 Hardev Ram and DW-3 Shri Nag, who is her father. One other witness DW-4 Chet Ram was given up as having turned hostile. My daughter is aged about 3 years and she has been kept in the house of my parents." 13. In her defence, the appellant examined DW-1 Dr. R.D. Anand, DW-2 Hardev Ram and DW-3 Shri Nag, who is her father. One other witness DW-4 Chet Ram was given up as having turned hostile. 14. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned State Counsel at length and have gone through the evidence and the ancillary record with their assistance. The learned counsel for the appellant has laid great stress on the plea taken up by her in her statement under Section 313, Cr.P.C, which has been recorded in its entirety here above. On the basis of the same, it has been argued on her behalf that the appellant was fully justified in killing her husband in exercise of her right of private defence. On the other hand, it has been argued on behalf of the State by the learned counsel that the defence taken up by the appellant as incorporated in her above statement under Section 313, Cr.P.C. during the trial, has not been put to any one of the prosecution witnesses in cross-examination except that of the Investigating Officer i.e. Inspector Hans Raj PW-14, therefore, according to the submission put forth on behalf of the respondent-State, this plea of right of private defence is false one and purely an after-thought on the part of the appellant. This is further supplemented by the argument that at no time during the investigation or trial, did the appellant come forward and offer hserself or even asked for her medical examination in order to prove this plea of self-defence. 15. The learned trial court has not relied on the testimony of the child witness i.e. the son of deceased Pal Chand and the appellant in so far as involvement of Tulsi Ram co-accused in the occurrence is concerned. He, however, appears to have accepted the testimony of the said child witness PW-11 Chaman Lal in so far as involvement of the appellant is concerned. According to the impugned judgment, the testimony of the said child witness in so far as the appellant is concerned, is not covered by the legal maxim Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus. He, however, appears to have accepted the testimony of the said child witness PW-11 Chaman Lal in so far as involvement of the appellant is concerned. According to the impugned judgment, the testimony of the said child witness in so far as the appellant is concerned, is not covered by the legal maxim Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus. In other words, the testimony of the said child witness Chaman Lal PW-11 has been accepted in so far as it relates to the appellant. It may be mentioned here that the said Chaman Lal was examined when he was aged 9 years on 30.10.1996. This was done by the learned trial court after satisfying himself that though being a child witness, he understands sanctity of oath. We find no reason to take a different view on this aspect of the case. 16. In his statement on oath as PW-11, Chaman Lal deposed that the deceased was his father and the appellant is his mother. He also identified her in Court. He has stated that he was present at the time of occurrence as he was residing with his parents in village Badsu. According to him, his mother (appellant) had attacked his father with the sickle. He has further stated that the thighs, arms and the head of his father received injuries from the weapons used by his mother and the aforesaid Tulsi Ram. He has further stated that thereafter his father was wrapped in a mattress and was taken out of the house but he does not know where it was thrown by both of them. He has also stated that when he was going to his school the next day, his mother had told him that he should not disclose the incident that murder was committed by her and Tulsi Ram. 17. In cross-examination, he has stated that his father had not consumed liquor on that occasion and was sleeping at the time of occurrence. He has also stated that his parents had not quarrelled with each other during the night. He has also stated that he has disclosed to the police that his mother had hit his father with the sickle, however, this fact does not find mention in his said statement mark DA. He has also stated that the thighs, arms and head were severed by the attack. 18. He has also stated that he has disclosed to the police that his mother had hit his father with the sickle, however, this fact does not find mention in his said statement mark DA. He has also stated that the thighs, arms and head were severed by the attack. 18. It has come in his cross-examination at the trial on behalf of the appellant, that he is residing with his fathers sister (bua) Rama Devi for the last one month. According to him, when his father was attacked neither he was naked nor his mother was naked. There were corresponding cuts on the clothes of his father from the injuries received by him. He has denied the suggestion that he has been tutored by the police to make such statement. He also denied that his mother has not attacked his father and that neither the legs nor the arms were severed. PW-3 Padma Devi has deposed that Pal Chand was her nephew and the appellant was married to him. About four years back in the month of Katak she had gone to cut grass (her statemetn was recorded on 29.10.1996). When she returned, the appellant came to her house at about 11.00 a.m. She bowed and toched her feet and thereafter sat down and told this witness that her husband Pal Chand had not come back home the previous night, therefore, a search should be carried out for him. On this, the appellant and this witness set out in search of Pal Chand in the Nala. On reaching the temple of Baba, they did not find Pal Chand there. Meanwhile, this witness felt hungry, but was sent by the appellant towards the Nalla where the dead body was lying, while the appellant herself went towards the opposite direction. 19. In cross-examination, this witness has denied that Pal Chand deceased used to take liquor by stating that she did not see him taking liquor at any time. She also denied the suggestion that the deceased used to beat his father. 19. In cross-examination, this witness has denied that Pal Chand deceased used to take liquor by stating that she did not see him taking liquor at any time. She also denied the suggestion that the deceased used to beat his father. It has further come in her cross-examination that she had told Girja Devi appellant at the time of the search of the deceased that she was feeling hungry, the latter did not say anything instead, told this witness that she should go towards the Nalla in a particular direction, while the appellant herself started going upward from the temple, meaning thereby in the opposite direction. 20. PW-4 Bhag Singh runs a shop at Village Badsu. He has stated that on 6.10.1993, he had gone to Nerchowk to purchase Kerosene at about 12.00 noon. At about 2.30 p.m Stander Singh, the son of his uncle met him and informed about the murder of Pal Chand. Then both of them came to their village on a scooter. They also went to the spot where the dead body of Pal Chand was lying in the Nalla. A lot of persons had already gathered at the spot. This witness alongwith Sunder Singh and the appellant went to Police Station Balh to lodge the FIR. Thereafter, the police had accompanied them to the spot and started investigation. According to PW-4, there were lot of injuries on the dead body and there was nothing around it except the blood. 21. This witness Bhag Singh is also a witness of the disclosure statement of the appellant resulting in the recovery of weapons i.e. Darati (Sickle), Darat and Danda. In cross-examination, he has denied the suggestion that when Pal Chand was alive, people used to pelt stones on his house. He also denied that he used to guard the house of the deceased during night. He has stated that the deceased never consumed liquor and has denied that the deceased used to beat his wife, children and father. 22. PW-14 is the Investigating Officer. He has deposed about the investigation conduced by him in the manner as set out herdabove from paras 4 to 10. In the concluding portion of his examination-in-chief PW-14 has stated that it came to his notice during investigation that deceased used to keep the appellant naked and was made to stand throughout the night in that position. He has deposed about the investigation conduced by him in the manner as set out herdabove from paras 4 to 10. In the concluding portion of his examination-in-chief PW-14 has stated that it came to his notice during investigation that deceased used to keep the appellant naked and was made to stand throughout the night in that position. He used to do unnatural offence on her and also enjoyed oral sex. 23. In cross-examination, he has stated that it was revealed by the appellant that her husband had visited her hosue during the night prior to his death, but PW-14 could not say that she had revealed that he has drunk at that time. According to PW-14, Girja Devi had stated during her interrogation that, when the deceased came to the house during night, he had sex with her and thereafter also had unnatural sex with her. He has admitted that the appellant had revealed to him that after doing both the acts, the deceased had insisted upon her to suck his organ for which she refused. 24. The medical evidence in this case consists of the testimony of Dr. S.S. Guleria (PW-10). As per his statement, postmortem was conducted by him on the dead body of Pal Chand (report in this connection being Ex.PT). He found seven injuries on the dead body. They are as follows : "1. Incised wound at the bottom of neck one inch from the right of mid line going to left. It was 5" x 2" x 1.5" cutting the wind pipe, food pipe, subclavian and common carotid artery alongwith muscles. 2. Incised wound sub mandible region on left side 3" x 3/ 4" cutting muscles and causing fracture of the mandible. 3. Incised wound left side of face 1-1/2" x 1/2 x 1/2" fracture of mandible was present. 4. Incised wound in the sub mental region in midline 3" x 1" x 1" cutting the mandible. 5. Incised wound over nape of the neck 1-1/2" x 1/2" x 1/ 2" cutting muscles. 6. Incised wound over left testicle 3" x 3". Left testicle was lying outside the wound. 7. Contusion over sacral region, blakish colour 1" x 1" irregular. As per the opinion of the Doctor, the deceased died due to injury No. 1 leading to respiratory failure associated with haemorrhage. 6. Incised wound over left testicle 3" x 3". Left testicle was lying outside the wound. 7. Contusion over sacral region, blakish colour 1" x 1" irregular. As per the opinion of the Doctor, the deceased died due to injury No. 1 leading to respiratory failure associated with haemorrhage. In cross-examination, he has stated that it is difficult for him to say as to which injury mentioned above tallies with the Darat or sickle Exts. P-l and P-4, respectively. He has stated that it can be either of these weapons. He has further opined that the sickle can cause some of the injuries mentioned above. 25. The testimony of the child witness Chaman Lal as PW 11 appears to us to be natural and credible in so far as the inculpation of the appellant in the occurrence is concerned. The gist of his examination-in-chief and cross-examination as discussed above, together with his entire statement when read as a whole, inspires confidence. It needs to be borne in mind that having already lost his father in the occurrence, he would have no reason to depose against his own mother, rather natural mother, he having been born from the womb of the appellant, in order to falsely implicate her and thus lose both his parent in the bargain. His statement appear to be quite natural and thus truthful. At the cost of repetition be it stated that at the time of his deposition in Court, he was aged 9 years and thus was at the right stage of life to understand the implications and consequences of his testimony. We are satisfied after great thought and careful deliberation, that on examination of his statement, the version of the occurrence given by this child witness has a ring of truth in it. 26. On behalf of the appellant it has been urged with great vehemence by her learned counsel that she was forced to kill her own husband due to the fact that she was left with no option but to exercise her right of private defence of her own body and thus save her life as otherwise the deceased had made his intention quite clear when on the refusal of the appellant to submit to his perverse desire of having oral sex with him, the deceased had caught hold of the Daraf in his hands and threatened to kill her. 27. 27. On the face of it, the argument advanced on behalf of the appellant by her learned counsel appears to be plausible. However, when considered in depth by jutaposing the same in the light of the evidence which has come on record and discussed above, it loses its force altogether. The first reason for coining to this conclusion straightaway is that except putting this version of the right of private defence of her body in order to save her own life by the appellant during the cross-examination of PW-14, Hans Raj Inspector i.e. the Investigating Officer, the same has not been put to any other witness examined by the prosecution, not even her son Chaman Lal PW-11. In these circumstances, as forcefully submitted by the learned Addl. Advocate General assisted by the learned Assistant Advocate General, appearing on behalf of the State, this plea of exercise of right of private defence on behalf of the appellant is clearly an after thought and thus a false plea. Otherwise there was no reason as to why this defence was not taken during the cross-examination of all the PWs for which there is no explanation on the record, much less from the learned counsel for the appellant. 28. The matter can be looked at from another angle also. If the version as set-up in the defence taken before us by the learned counsel for the appellant about exercise of the right of private defence of her body and thus her own life was true, then there is no explanation on the record as to why she did not offer herself for being medically examined immediately or soon after the occurrence so as to establish her bona fides and thus also prove that she exercised her right of self-defence from allegedly bestial husband. In this context it is significant to note that in her statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C, the relevant portion of which has been reproduced above in this judgment, she has categorically mentioned that at the time immediately prior to the occurrence, she had been given a kick by the deceased as a result of which she fell down. She has also stated therein that after first having sex with her in the natural course and then in the unnatural course, the deceased had given her beatings also. She has also stated therein that after first having sex with her in the natural course and then in the unnatural course, the deceased had given her beatings also. If that be so, there certainly would have been some tell-tale signs of the same on her body, which could only be revealed if she had been medically examined immediately or soon after the occurrence. But that was not done. This is an additional circumstance which militates against the version of the occurrence set-up by the appellant. Our attention in this behalf has been drawn by the learned State Counsel to the provision of Section 54-of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which says that at the time when a suspected person is produced before a Magistrate or at any time during the period of his detention in custody, if he alleges that the examination of his body will afford evidence which will disprove the commission by him of any offence or which will establish the commission by any other person of any offence against his body, the concerned Magistrate shall, if so requested by the arrested person, direct the medical examination of the body of such a person, except if the concerned Magistrate is of the view that such a request has been made for the purpose of delay or for defeating the ends of justice. 29. There is nothing on record to show that at any time during the period of her detention by the Police after her arrest in connection with the present case, the appellant had made such an allegation or request as contemplated under Section 54 Cr.P.C. That being the factual position, and in view of the above discussion, we find no substance in the plea of exercise of right of private defence of her own body in order to allegedly save her life by the appellant from the perceived threat at the hands of her late husband, whom she was thus forced to kill with her own hands. In fairness to the learned counsel for the appellant he has placed reliance on some case law in support of his above argument. The authorities thus cited by him are: 1. Gurdial Singh v. State of Punjab, (AIR 1995 SC 2468); 2. Ranjit Singh v. State of Punjab, (1998) 7 SCC 149); 3. Vijender etc. etc. v. State of Delhi, (1997) 6 SCC 171); 4. The authorities thus cited by him are: 1. Gurdial Singh v. State of Punjab, (AIR 1995 SC 2468); 2. Ranjit Singh v. State of Punjab, (1998) 7 SCC 149); 3. Vijender etc. etc. v. State of Delhi, (1997) 6 SCC 171); 4. State of West Bengal v. Vindu Lachmandas Sakhrani alias Deru, (AIR 1994 SC 772); and 5. Yogendra Morarji v. The State of Gujarat, (AIR 1980 SC 660). On consideration of the above case law with reference to the facts as brought out in the evidence in the present case, we have no hesitation in holding that the authorities referred to above and relied on behalf of the appellant by her learned counsel are distinguishable and thus of no avail to her. In this context, it would be relevant to mention here that an independent charge for the offence under Section 302 IPC was framed by the learned Sessions Judge against appellant Girja Devi by his order dated 22nd November, 1994. 30. Court however, finds force in the alternative plea of the learned counsel for the appellant that even if the prosecution case is taken as having been proved against her, which has been proved to the hilt as discussed above, the offence committed by the appellant falls within the ambit of Section 304 Part-I and not a more grave offence under Section 302 IPC. The circumstances as culled out from the materials out of the prosecution evidence clearly point a finger leading to exception (1) of Section 300 IPC in the present case. These circumstances do suggest that deceased Pal Chand was somewhat of a pervert in his sexual habit and they also suggest that he wanted to satisfy his perverted lust on his hapless wife i.e. appellant, who was thus forced to kill him under grave and sudden provocation. In our considered view, therefore, the conviction of the appellant should have been under Section 304 Part-I, rather than under Section 302 IPC. In somewhat similar circumstances, the Apex Court had taken the same view and adopted that course in the case reported as State of U.P. v. Lakhmi (1998) 4 Supreme Court Cases. 31. For the reasons recorded above, the appeal is partially allowed to the extent that the conviction of the appellant is altered from Section 302 IPC to Section 304 Part-I IPC. 31. For the reasons recorded above, the appeal is partially allowed to the extent that the conviction of the appellant is altered from Section 302 IPC to Section 304 Part-I IPC. In so far as the sentence is concerned, we have to take into consideration the circumstances of the case as set-out in the previous paragraph above. Additionally, it appears from the record that the appellant was taken into custody on 8.10.1993. This is so stated by PW-14 Hans Raj, Investigating Officer of this case. Thereafter she appears to have remained in jail throughout, as can be made out from the record. Taking all the circumstances into consideration, we are of the considered view that the ends of justice will be met if the sentence is reduced to that already undergone by her. As regards the fine, the same is reduced to Rs. 1000/- (rupees one thousand), in default of payment of which she will undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month from the date of this judgment. The impugned judgment is modified accordingly and this appeal is disposed of in the above terms. Appeal allowed.