How to Challenge Evidentiary Deficiencies in Cheating Cases to Secure a Quash Order from the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh

Cheating offences under the prevailing criminal provisions attract severe penalties, and the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh routinely entertains petitions seeking a quash of the proceedings when the prosecution’s evidential foundation is critically weak. The procedural posture begins in the sessions court where the charge‑sheet is filed, proceeds to the trial, and may culminate in a writ petition before the High Court if the defence believes that the evidentiary material fails to satisfy the mandatory standards of proof. In the High Court, a petition under the relevant provisions of the BNS, BNSS, and BSA can be filed to set aside the criminal proceedings, but only if the petition is meticulously prepared, evidentiary gaps are convincingly highlighted, and the High Court’s jurisdictional thresholds are respected.

The stakes in cheating matters are amplified by the commercial context in which many allegations arise—bank fraud, misrepresentation in contract execution, and digital transaction disputes. Consequently, the prosecution often relies on documentary evidence such as bank statements, electronic records, and witness testimonies that may be incomplete, inconsistently recorded, or unlawfully obtained. When such deficiencies exist, the defence’s principal avenue is to demonstrate that the evidentiary trail does not sustain a prima facie case, thereby warranting a quash order. The High Court’s discretion to stay or dismiss proceedings is anchored in the principle that an accused should not be forced to endure trial where the prosecution has not met the evidentiary threshold mandated by the BSA.

Effective preparation for a High Court quash petition demands a systematic audit of every piece of material gathered by the investigating agency, a forensic review of electronic evidence, and a strategic plan for presenting statutory objections. The defence must also anticipate the trial court’s potential reliance on secondary evidence and be ready to argue that such evidence is either inadmissible under the BNS or fails to meet the reliability standards imposed by the BNSS. The intricate interplay of statutory interpretation, procedural safeguards, and evidentiary doctrine makes the defence’s preparatory phase the decisive factor that separates a dismissed petition from a dismissed case.

Legal Issue: Evidentiary Deficiencies in Cheating Prosecutions before the Punjab and Haryana High Court

Cheating is typified by the deception of a victim resulting in wrongful gain or loss. The statutory framework governing cheating in the jurisdiction of the Punjab and Haryana High Court is encapsulated in the BNS, which prescribes the substantive elements required for conviction. However, the crux of a quash petition lies not in the substantive description of the offence but in the quality and admissibility of the evidence presented by the prosecution. The High Court scrutinises whether the charge‑sheet, the material evidence, and the investigative reports collectively satisfy the statutory burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt as envisioned by the BSA.

One of the most common evidentiary shortcomings in cheating cases involves incomplete documentary trails. For instance, bank statements presented without proper authentication, transaction logs missing critical timestamps, or electronic communications lacking metadata verification are prone to challenge. The High Court has repeatedly held that the absence of a chain of custody breaks the evidentiary continuum, rendering the documents vulnerable to exclusion under the BNSS. Defence counsel must therefore meticulously examine each document for signatures, seals, and corroborative entries that link the alleged fraudulent act directly to the accused.

Witness testimony in cheating matters frequently suffers from inconsistencies, leading to credibility issues. The prosecution may rely on statements recorded by one police officer and later reproduced by another, or on the testimony of a victim who may have a commercial interest in the outcome. The High Court evaluates the voluntariness, corroboration, and possible prejudice of such statements. If the defence can demonstrate that a witness’s testimony was obtained under duress, was influenced by material benefit, or contains material contradictions, it creates a persuasive ground for a quash order on the basis that the prosecution’s case is fundamentally unreliable.

Electronic evidence—emails, SMS, WhatsApp chats, and digital signatures—has become a pivotal component of cheating prosecutions. Yet the admissibility of electronic records is conditioned upon compliance with the procedural safeguards of the BNS regarding authentication, integrity, and the absence of tampering. A defence team must engage qualified forensic experts to verify hash values, confirm server logs, and establish the provenance of any digital artefact. Any lapse in the forensic chain, such as an unexplained gap in the log files or the inability to produce the original device, jeopardises the admissibility of the evidence.

The High Court also assesses whether the investigation adhered to the procedural safeguards prescribed by the BSA. Unlawful detention, failure to record statements in compliance with the statutory format, or reliance on coerced confessions are ground for the court to invalidate the entire investigation. Defence preparation therefore includes a comprehensive review of the investigation notebook, the FIR, and the arrest memo to identify any procedural infirmities that can be raised as a basis for quashing the proceedings.

Finally, the doctrine of “prima facie” requirement under the BNS obliges the prosecution to establish a case that, on the face of it, merits a trial. If the defence can demonstrate that the cumulative evidence fails to satisfy any one of the essential ingredients of cheating—such as the element of deception, the intention to defraud, or the causation of loss—a quash petition can succeed. The High Court’s jurisprudence underscores that a quash order is appropriate where the material on record does not even permit the trial court to entertain the case, let alone proceed to a verdict.

Strategic Considerations in Selecting Defence Counsel for Quash Petitions

Choosing the appropriate legal representative is a decisive factor in the success of a quash petition in cheating cases before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The optimal counsel must possess demonstrable experience with the High Court’s procedural nuances, a proven track record in handling evidentiary challenges, and access to forensic specialists capable of scrutinising electronic records. The initial consultation should focus on the lawyer’s familiarity with the specific statutory provisions of the BNS, BNSS, and BSA, as well as their ability to draft precise, well‑researched petitions that anticipate the bench’s line of questioning.

Effective defence counsel will conduct a parallel investigation to verify the prosecution’s evidentiary claims. This involves commissioning independent forensic audits, securing affidavits from potential witnesses, and obtaining certified copies of documentary evidence that may contradict the prosecution’s version. The counsel’s network of expert witnesses—digital forensics analysts, banking auditors, and forensic accountants—must be mobilised early to ensure that their reports are ready for submission alongside the petition.

Another strategic dimension is the counsel’s proficiency in drafting comprehensive annexures to the quash petition. The High Court expects a clear, tabular presentation of each piece of evidence, the alleged deficiency, and the statutory provision that supports the objection. Counsel who have previously secured quash orders are adept at constructing a “defence matrix” that aligns each evidentiary item with the corresponding legal test, thereby streamlining the court’s review process.

Litigation strategy also demands that the counsel anticipate counter‑arguments from the prosecution. The defence must be prepared to rebut claims that the evidentiary gaps are “technical” rather than substantive, or that the alleged deficiencies are remedied by the presence of corroborative testimony. A seasoned lawyer will pre‑empt such objections by filing supplementary affidavits, highlighting jurisprudential precedents from the Punjab and Haryana High Court, and, when necessary, invoking the principle of “fair trial” enshrined in the BSA.

Finally, the counsel’s reputation within the High Court ecosystem—relationships with bench members, familiarity with the High Court’s library of rulings, and understanding of the court’s docket management—can influence procedural efficiency. While ethical constraints preclude any undue influence, a lawyer who is respected for scholarly submissions and procedural diligence often benefits from a smoother hearing schedule, which is crucial when timing is a pivotal factor in preserving the right to a swift quash of criminal proceedings.

Best Lawyers Practising Criminal Defence at Punjab and Haryana High Court

SimranLaw Chandigarh

★★★★★

SimranLaw Chandigarh maintains a robust practice in the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh and also appears before the Supreme Court of India, bringing a dual‑court perspective to quash petitions in cheating cases. The team’s methodological approach involves a forensic audit of the prosecution’s documentary trail, rigorous cross‑verification of electronic evidence, and strategic drafting of petitions that align evidentiary objections with the precise language of the BNS and BNSS. Their experience in handling high‑profile cheating prosecutions equips them to anticipate the High Court’s scrutiny of procedural compliance and to craft arguments that foreground the lack of a prima facie case.

• Comprehensive forensic review of bank statements and transaction logs for authenticity.
• Preparation of detailed annexures mapping each piece of evidence to statutory deficiencies.
• Drafting of quash petitions under the BNS, BNSS, and BSA with supporting expert affidavits.
• Representation before both the Punjab and Haryana High Court and the Supreme Court for appellate relief.
• Strategic counsel on preservation of electronic evidence and chain‑of‑custody compliance.
• Assistance in filing interlocutory applications to halt trial proceedings pending High Court order.

Brightlaw Legal LLP

★★★★☆

Brightlaw Legal LLP specializes in criminal defence across the spectrum of economic offences, with a dedicated focus on cheating prosecutions before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Their practice integrates a multidisciplinary team of forensic accountants and digital analysts, ensuring that each quash petition is supported by technical expertise. Brightlaw emphasizes pre‑litigation evidence mapping, identifying gaps in the prosecution’s case before filing, which often results in the High Court dismissing the proceedings at the earliest stage.

• Forensic accounting to trace fund flows and detect discrepancies in financial records.
• Electronic data preservation and analysis to challenge the admissibility of digital communications.
• Drafting of statutory‑compliant quash applications highlighting evidentiary insufficiencies.
• Preparation of corroborative witness statements and affidavits to undermine prosecution narratives.
• Intervention in trial courts to seek stay orders while High Court petition proceeds.
• Tailored legal opinion on procedural safeguards under the BSA.

Advocate Nikhita Sharma

★★★★☆

Advocate Nikhita Sharma has cultivated a niche in defending accused persons in cheating matters before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, with an emphasis on meticulous statutory analysis. Her practice is distinguished by an in‑depth review of the investigation notebook, enabling her to pinpoint procedural lapses such as non‑compliance with the mandatory recording of statements. Advocate Sharma leverages these findings to argue that the High Court should quash the proceedings on the foundation of fundamental procedural violations.

• Critical examination of FIR and charge‑sheet for non‑conformity with BSA requirements.
• Identification of procedural lapses in statement recording and custodial processes.
• Preparation of expert testimonies to contest authenticity of electronic evidence.
• Drafting of high‑impact submissions citing relevant High Court precedents.
• Coordination with investigative agencies to obtain missing or corrected records.
• Strategic filing of interlocutory applications for preservation of evidence.

Sharma & Rao Legal Chambers

★★★★☆

Sharma & Rao Legal Chambers offers a collaborative defence platform where senior advocates and junior counsel synergize to challenge evidentiary gaps in cheating cases before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Their approach couples granular document analysis with robust legal research, ensuring that each quash petition is anchored in precedent and statutory interpretation. The chambers’ systematic methodology includes a three‑stage audit: documentary verification, witness credibility assessment, and electronic evidence validation.

• Stage‑wise audit of prosecution documents for completeness and authenticity.
• Credibility assessment of eyewitness testimonies through cross‑examination strategies.
• Technical validation of digital evidence via forensic experts.
• Preparation of comprehensive legal briefs citing jurisprudence on evidential standards.
• Advocacy for interim relief to prevent trial continuation during petition adjudication.
• Coordination with forensic labs for expedited report generation.

Menon Legal Solutions

★★★★☆

Menon Legal Solutions concentrates on economic offences, with cheating cases forming a core component of its practice before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The firm’s strength lies in its ability to dissect complex financial schematics and present succinct arguments that underscore the insufficiency of the prosecution’s proof. Menon Legal Solutions routinely prepares detailed charts that juxtapose alleged fraudulent transactions against actual banking records, thereby exposing inconsistencies that merit a quash order.

• Construction of transaction flow diagrams contrasting alleged and actual fund movements.
• Detailed forensic review of loan documents, guarantees, and security agreements.
• Legal research on BNS provisions specific to deception and intent.
• Preparation of statutory affidavits supporting evidence exclusion.
• Filing of petitions for preservation of assets pending High Court decision.
• Strategic engagement with banking officials for clarification of ambiguous entries.

Advocate Kavya Nair

★★★★☆

Advocate Kavya Nair brings a focused litigation style to the representation of accused individuals in cheating prosecutions before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Her practice emphasizes the early identification of evidential lacunae, particularly in cases where the prosecution’s reliance on third‑party testimony is questionable. Advocate Nair skillfully frames arguments around the lack of independent corroboration, a key factor that the High Court evaluates when deciding on a quash petition.

• Analysis of third‑party witness statements for independence and lack of bias.
• Cross‑verification of documentary evidence with original source documents.
• Drafting of precise objections under BNSS on admissibility of secondary evidence.
• Preparation of expert affidavits on forensic document examination.
• Submission of applications for protection of privileged communications.
• Strategic use of precedent to demonstrate High Court’s tolerance for evidential gaps.

Advocate Meena Singhvi

★★★★☆

Advocate Meena Singhvi has developed a reputation for incisive defence in cheating matters before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, especially where the prosecution’s case hinges on electronic records that may have been altered. Her practice engages seasoned cyber‑forensic analysts to conduct integrity checks on digital evidence, enabling her to argue for exclusion under the BNSS where the chain of custody is compromised.

• Engagement of cyber‑forensic experts to verify hash values and metadata.
• Identification of tampering indicators in electronic communications.
• Preparation of detailed affidavit bundles supporting evidence suppression.
• Legal drafting of quash applications emphasizing procedural violations.
• Coordination with telecom service providers for authentic call data records.
• Strategic filing of interim applications to stay proceedings pending forensic report.

Vernon Legal Associates

★★★★☆

Vernon Legal Associates distinguishes itself through a multidisciplinary team that combines criminal law expertise with financial forensic capabilities. In cheating cases before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the firm adopts a holistic review of both documentary and electronic evidence, ensuring that any procedural misstep—be it an unauthenticated financial statement or a non‑compliant digital exhibit—is highlighted in the quash petition.

• Holistic audit of financial statements for authentication gaps.
• Verification of digital evidence compliance with BNSS standards.
• Preparation of expert reports on forensic accounting and data integrity.
• Drafting of comprehensive petitions citing specific BNS clauses.
• Strategic use of interlocutory applications for evidence preservation.
• Engagement with appellate specialists for post‑judgment relief if needed.

Advocate Parthiv Singh

★★★★☆

Advocate Parthiv Singh offers a nuanced defence strategy in cheating prosecutions before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, focusing on the procedural dimension of the investigation. He systematically reviews the arrest memo, the statement recording sheet, and the investigative diary to pinpoint any deviations from the procedural guardrails prescribed by the BSA. These procedural defects often form the backbone of his arguments for a quash order.

• Scrutiny of arrest and detention records for statutory compliance.
• Identification of non‑compliant statement‑recording procedures.
• Preparation of affidavits contesting the legality of the investigative process.
• Drafting of statutory objections under BNSS on inadmissible statements.
• Coordination with rights‑group activists for procedural oversight.
• Filing of applications for restoration of rights post‑quash order.

Mehta, Joshi & Co.

★★★★☆

Mehta, Joshi & Co. brings a seasoned litigation desk that has dealt extensively with economic offences, including cheating, before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Their practice rests on precise statutory interpretation of the BNS and an exhaustive evidentiary matrix that isolates each alleged deficiency. The firm routinely prepares a “defence ledger” that catalogues every piece of prosecution evidence alongside the specific statutory provision it fails to satisfy.

• Creation of a defence ledger mapping evidence to statutory shortcomings.
• Detailed forensic analysis of banking documents for irregularities.
• Legal research on High Court judgments interpreting cheating provisions.
• Drafting of robust quash petitions with supporting expert affidavits.
• Strategic filing of stay applications to pause trial proceedings.
• Coordination with legislative experts on recent amendments to the BNS.

Advocate Praveen Chandra

★★★★☆

Advocate Praveen Chandra focuses on crafting precise legal arguments that target the admissibility of evidence in cheating cases before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. He places particular emphasis on the reliability of witness testimony, employing forensic linguistics to dissect inconsistencies and potential coaching. His approach often leads to successful quash orders when the High Court finds that the prosecution’s case lacks credible testimonial support.

• Forensic linguistic analysis of witness statements for inconsistencies.
• Preparation of expert affidavits challenging the reliability of testimonies.
• Drafting of detailed objections under BNSS on testimonial admissibility.
• Strategic use of precedent to demonstrate High Court’s stance on unreliable witnesses.
• Coordination with psychologists for credibility assessments.
• Filing of applications for protection against self‑incriminating statements.

InnoLaw Services

★★★★☆

InnoLaw Services adopts a technology‑driven defence methodology for cheating prosecutions before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The firm utilizes advanced data‑analytics tools to cross‑verify transaction patterns, detect anomalies, and generate visual representations of fund movements. These analytical outputs are pivotal in illustrating to the High Court that the alleged fraudulent patterns are either non‑existent or misconstrued, thereby supporting a quash petition.

• Data‑analytics based verification of transaction histories.
• Visualization of fund flow charts to expose inconsistencies.
• Preparation of expert affidavits on statistical anomalies.
• Drafting of petitions that integrate analytical evidence under BNS.
• Strategic filing of applications for expert testimony admission.
• Coordination with IT specialists for secure handling of digital evidence.

Advocate Mahesh Kulkarni

★★★★☆

Advocate Mahesh Kulkarni leverages his extensive background in financial crime defence to challenge cheating allegations before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. He meticulously reviews loan agreements, security documents, and collateral filings to uncover procedural defects, such as lack of proper execution or missing signatures, which he then foregrounds in the quash petition as fatal evidentiary infirmities.

• Examination of loan and security documents for execution defects.
• Verification of signatures and notarisation compliance.
• Preparation of detailed affidavit evidence on document authenticity.
• Drafting of statutory objections citing BNSS provisions on document admissibility.
• Strategic coordination with banking officials for clarification of terms.
• Filing of interim relief applications to preserve assets.

Advocate Ramesh Prasad

★★★★☆

Advocate Ramesh Prasad’s practice focuses on procedural safeguards in cheating cases before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. He places particular emphasis on the legality of the investigation’s search and seizure operations, often arguing that any violation of the BSA’s procedural safeguards invalidates the collected evidence and warrants a quash order.

• Review of search and seizure orders for statutory compliance.
• Identification of unlawfully seized documents or devices.
• Preparation of expert affidavits on procedural violations.
• Drafting of quash petitions highlighting evidence exclusion under BNSS.
• Strategic filing of applications to return unlawfully seized property.
• Coordination with rights‑advocacy groups for oversight reports.

Advocate Anurag Jain

★★★★☆

Advocate Anurag Jain combines rigorous statutory analysis with a focus on the victim‑defendant interaction in cheating prosecutions before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. He scrutinises the victim’s complaint for inconsistencies, omissions, and lack of corroborative material, constructing arguments that the prosecutorial narrative is built on a shaky factual foundation, justifying a quash order.

• Critical examination of victim complaints for factual gaps.
• Cross‑checking of alleged loss with bank and transaction records.
• Preparation of affidavits challenging the victim’s version of events.
• Drafting of statutory objections under BNS on lack of concrete evidence.
• Strategic coordination with victim‑rights counselors for balanced narratives.
• Filing of applications to seek clarification on disputed facts.

Lakshmi Law Chambers

★★★★☆

Lakshmi Law Chambers provides a comprehensive defence service suite for cheating cases before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, emphasizing the integration of forensic audit reports with statutory objections. Their team prepares in‑depth forensic audit reports that detail every irregularity in the financial documents presented by the prosecution, using these reports as the backbone of their quash petitions.

• Preparation of forensic audit reports on financial documentation.
• Identification of anomalies in account ledgers and reconciliations.
• Drafting of quash petitions anchored in audit findings.
• Strategic filing of interlocutory applications for evidence preservation.
• Coordination with forensic accountants for court‑ready testimony.
• Legal research on recent High Court rulings on forensic evidence.

Kaur & Suri Advocacy

★★★★☆

Kaur & Suri Advocacy focuses on the intersection of criminal law and digital forensics in cheating prosecutions before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Their practice routinely challenges the authenticity of electronic evidence by presenting expert analysis on data integrity, encryption standards, and log‑file continuity, thereby establishing grounds for a quash order.

• Expert analysis of encryption standards applied to electronic evidence.
• Verification of log‑file continuity and timestamp integrity.
• Preparation of affidavits contesting the admissibility of tampered data.
• Drafting of statutory objections under BNSS on electronic evidence.
• Strategic coordination with cybersecurity firms for rapid evidence review.
• Filing of applications for protection of privileged digital communications.

Advocate Nisha Patel

★★★★☆

Advocate Nisha Patel’s defence strategy in cheating cases before the Punjab and Haryana High Court centres on the meticulous reconstruction of the alleged fraudulent transaction timeline. By juxtaposing the prosecution’s timeline with actual transaction logs and system-generated receipts, she uncovers discrepancies that undermine the prosecution’s narrative, supporting a petition for quash.

• Reconstruction of transaction timelines using system‑generated receipts.
• Comparison of prosecution’s timeline with actual banking logs.
• Preparation of expert affidavits on timeline inconsistencies.
• Drafting of statutory objections under BNS on lack of causation.
• Strategic filing of applications for forensic examination of server logs.
• Coordination with banking officials to obtain original transaction records.

Advocate Narayan Joshi

★★★★☆

Advocate Narayan Joshi brings a specialized focus on evidentiary chain‑of‑custody compliance in cheating prosecutions before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. He examines each handover of documents, from the investigating officer to the trial court, to pinpoint breaks in the chain that render the evidence inadmissible, forming the crux of his quash petitions.

• Mapping of evidence handover points to assess chain‑of‑custody integrity.
• Identification of undocumented transfers or missing custody logs.
• Preparation of affidavits highlighting chain‑of‑custody breaches.
• Drafting of statutory objections under BNSS on evidence admissibility.
• Strategic coordination with forensic custodians for evidentiary reconstruction.
• Filing of applications for substitution of compromised evidence.

Advocate Preeti Nandal

★★★★☆

Advocate Preeti Nandal’s approach to cheating cases before the Punjab and Haryana High Court emphasizes the protection of the accused’s constitutional rights during investigation. She systematically reviews the arrest, interrogation, and statement‑recording processes for any infringement of rights under the BSA, using any violations as a cornerstone to argue for a quash order.

• Review of arrest procedures for compliance with constitutional safeguards.
• Examination of interrogation records for coercion or undue influence.
• Preparation of affidavits on rights violations during investigation.
• Drafting of quash petitions invoking BSA protections.
• Strategic filing of applications for restoration of rights post‑quash.
• Coordination with human‑rights NGOs for supportive documentation.

Practical Guidance for Preparing a Quash Petition in Cheating Cases before the Punjab and Haryana High Court

The operative timeline for a quash petition commences once the charge‑sheet is formally filed in the sessions court. Defence counsel must act promptly to secure the original investigative records, as the High Court expects contemporaneous documentation. A systematic collection of the following documents is indispensable: the FIR, charge‑sheet, investigation notebook, arrest memo, statement‑recording sheets, forensic reports, bank statements, electronic logs, and any correspondence with regulatory agencies. Each document should be indexed, labelled, and cross‑referenced against the specific allegations in the charge‑sheet.

Procedural caution dictates that every piece of evidence intended for challenge be accompanied by a sworn affidavit from a qualified expert. For documentary evidence, a forensic auditor should attest to authenticity; for electronic evidence, a cyber‑forensic analyst must certify the integrity of the data and confirm that the chain of custody was unbroken. These affidavits must be filed as annexures to the petition, with each affidavit explicitly citing the relevant clause of the BNS, BNSS, or BSA that supports the objection.

Strategically, the petition should open with a concise statement of facts, followed by a “Grounds for Quash” section that enumerates each evidentiary deficiency. The language must be precise, avoiding any extraneous narrative. For example, a ground might read: “The bank statement relied upon by the prosecution is an unauthenticated photocopy that lacks the bank’s official seal, thereby failing the authentication requirement under Clause 12 of the BNS.” Subsequent paragraphs should elaborate on why the deficiency is fatal, referencing High Court precedents that have dismissed similar evidence.

Timing is critical. The Punjab and Haryana High Court imposes strict timelines for filing interlocutory applications and for responding to any orders for amendment. Counsel should file a “Stay of Proceedings” application concurrently with the quash petition to prevent the trial court from advancing the case while the High Court deliberates. This stay application must be supported by a concise affidavit outlining the risk of irreversible prejudice if the trial proceeds.

Finally, the defence must anticipate the High Court’s request for supplementary material. It is prudent to maintain a readiness to submit additional expert reports, witness affidavits, or clarified documents within a ten‑day window after the order is passed. Maintaining a docket of all correspondence, filing receipts, and court orders in a secure, searchable format will ensure that the defence can respond swiftly, thereby reinforcing the credibility of the quash petition and enhancing the likelihood of a favourable order.