Navigating Interim Bail Applications After Arrest Under Cyber Laws: Tips for Litigants in Chandigarh – Punjab and Haryana High Court

Arrests under the Information Technology Act and related statutes trigger a cascade of procedural requirements that differ significantly from conventional criminal matters. In the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh, the urgency of securing interim bail hinges on the interplay between statutory bail provisions in the BNS, the scope of the BNSS, and the evidentiary standards prescribed by the BSA. An application for interim relief, when lodged promptly, can arrest the momentum of custodial detention and preserve the accused’s liberty pending a full trial. The high‑court’s discretionary power to grant interim bail rests on a meticulous assessment of risk factors, the nature of the alleged cyber offence, and the strength of the prosecution’s material.

Judicial pronouncements of the Punjab and Haryana High Court underscore the delicate balance between the State’s interest in preventing tampering of digital evidence and the fundamental right to liberty. A well‑crafted interim bail petition must articulate not only the factual matrix of the arrest but also the procedural safeguards that render continued detention unnecessary. Because cyber investigations often involve complex forensics, the court scrutinises the adequacy of disclosure, the specificity of the charges, and the presence of any pending investigations in lower courts. Failure to address these nuances can result in dismissal of the bail application and extended incarceration.

The stakes for litigants in Chandigarh are amplified by the rapid evolution of cyber‑crime jurisprudence. Amendments to the BNS and periodic revisions of the BNSS reflect a legislative intent to streamline bail procedures while protecting the integrity of digital evidence. Consequently, counsel must stay abreast of the latest procedural orders issued by the High Court, including circulars on interim applications, stand‑by orders, and the use of video‑conferencing for bail hearings. An informed approach to interim bail not only safeguards personal freedom but also positions the accused favorably for any subsequent anticipatory bail or regular bail proceedings.

Legal framework and procedural posture for interim bail in cyber crime matters

The statutory basis for bail in cyber‑related offences derives primarily from the BNS, which delineates the conditions under which an accused may be released on bail before trial. Section 439 of the BNS codifies the right to apply for bail, while Section 438 expands the scope to anticipatory bail, a tool increasingly invoked in cases involving alleged hacking, data theft, or unauthorized access to computer systems. The BNSS complements these provisions by specifying the grounds on which bail may be denied, such as risk of tampering with evidence, likelihood of influencing witnesses, or the gravity of the offence.

When a person is arrested under provisions of the Information Technology Act, the arrest memo issued by the investigating officer must be produced before the magistrate within 24 hours. The magistrate, guided by the BNSS, decides whether to remand the accused to police custody or judicial custody. In practice, the Punjab and Haryana High Court often intervenes at the stage of remand, especially when the accused seeks immediate interim bail on the premise that further custody would impede the preservation of digital evidence or jeopardise the accused’s professional livelihood.

Procedurally, an interim bail application is filed as a petition under Section 439 of the BNS before the appropriate bench of the High Court. The petition must be accompanied by a sworn affidavit, a copy of the FIR, the arrest memo, and any medical reports if the accused alleges health concerns. Supporting documents may include a no‑objection certificate from the investigating agency, though this is not mandatory. The petition should articulate the specific relief sought—whether a personal bond, surety bond, or a conditional order preserving the accused’s access to electronic devices for preparation of defence.

The High Court’s practice direction requires that interim bail petitions be marked “Urgent” and that the petitioner file a notice of motion indicating the date on which oral arguments will be heard. The court may, at its discretion, grant an interim order without hearing the prosecution if it is convinced that the balance of convenience favours release. However, the court may also adjourn the hearing to allow the State to present counter‑arguments, especially where the alleged offence involves large‑scale data breaches or financial fraud through cyber channels.

Recent judgments of the Punjab and Haryana High Court emphasize the importance of a detailed factual chronology. The petitioner must explain the exact conduct alleged, the digital evidence that the prosecution claims to possess, and the steps already taken to secure that evidence (such as forensic imaging). The court may issue a protective order directing the police to preserve the electronic medium in its original state, thereby mitigating the risk that interim bail could compromise the investigation.

In addition to the primary bail petition, the accused may simultaneously file an anticipatory bail petition under Section 438 of the BNS, seeking a pre‑emptive order that prevents arrest. While anticipatory bail is distinct, the two applications often intersect, and the High Court may consolidate the matters to avoid multiplicity of proceedings. The court typically requires the accused to furnish a clean‑record certificate, a declaration that they will cooperate with the investigation, and a pledge not to threaten or influence witnesses.

Given the technical nature of cyber‑crime evidence, the BSA plays a critical role in evaluating the admissibility of electronic records. An interim bail petition that challenges the authenticity or chain of custody of digital evidence must be supported by expert affidavits. The High Court may appoint a technical expert to verify the integrity of the evidence, and the outcome of that verification can influence the bail decision.

Criteria for selecting counsel experienced in interim bail and cyber crime

Effective representation in interim bail matters demands a blend of procedural acumen, substantive knowledge of cyber‑law, and familiarity with the High Court’s docket management. Counsel should demonstrate a track record of securing interim relief in cases where the accused faces allegations of hacking, phishing, identity theft, or unlawful interception of electronic communications. An attorney’s ability to draft a concise yet comprehensive bail petition, supported by technical expert opinions, is often decisive.

Prospective counsel must be conversant with the latest amendments to the BNS and BNSS, as well as the High Court’s practice directions on urgent applications. Experience in handling video‑conferenced bail hearings, which have become routine in the Chandigarh jurisdiction, is essential. Lawyers who have argued before the Punjab and Haryana High Court on matters involving forensic data preservation, electronic signature verification, and statutory interpretation of the Information Technology Act are better positioned to anticipate prosecutorial objections.

Client‑focused criteria include the attorney’s accessibility for rapid document exchange, readiness to file night‑time applications, and ability to secure interim protective orders swiftly. In cyber‑crime contexts, where evidence may be time‑sensitive, counsel must possess a network of forensic specialists who can provide affidavits within tight deadlines. The selection process should also consider the lawyer’s standing with the High Court registry, as frequent interactions with court clerks can expedite the filing of urgent motions.

Finally, ethical considerations remain paramount. Counsel must advise the accused on the realistic prospects of bail, balancing optimism with an honest appraisal of evidentiary strength. In cases where the High Court has indicated a propensity to deny bail for offences carrying a maximum imprisonment of ten years or more, counsel should explore alternative reliefs, such as conditional bail with restrictions on electronic device usage.

Best lawyers handling interim bail in cyber crime cases

SimranLaw Chandigarh

★★★★★

SimranLaw Chandigarh, with a practice spanning the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh and the Supreme Court of India, regularly engages in interim bail matters involving complex cyber‑crime allegations. The firm’s team combines litigation expertise with a deep understanding of digital forensics, enabling them to craft bail petitions that address both procedural requisites under the BNS and evidentiary challenges under the BSA. Their experience includes securing protective orders that preserve electronic evidence while facilitating the accused’s release on personal bond.

• Filing interim bail petitions under Section 439 of the BNS for alleged hacking offences.
• Drafting anticipatory bail applications under Section 438 of the BNS in phishing investigations.
• Obtaining protective orders to safeguard digital evidence during bail proceedings.
• Coordinating forensic expert affidavits to challenge the admissibility of electronic records.
• Representing clients in urgent video‑conferenced bail hearings before the High Court.
• Preparing no‑objection certificates and compliance statements for the investigating agency.
• Advising on conditions of bail involving restrictions on internet usage.

Sharma, Bhatia & Co. Advocates

★★★★☆

Sharma, Bhatia & Co. Advocates have built a reputation in the Punjab and Haryana High Court for handling interim bail applications in cases of unauthorized access to computer systems and data breaches. Their approach emphasizes meticulous documentation of the arrest circumstances and a thorough analysis of the BNSS grounds for denial of bail. The firm’s counsel often engages with cyber‑security consultants to corroborate the accused’s claim of non‑involvement.

• Interim bail petitions for offences under the Information Technology Act involving data theft.
• Assistance in preparing forensic audit reports to support bail applications.
• Strategic filing of interim applications to pre‑empt custodial investigations.
• Negotiating bail conditions that permit limited access to electronic devices for defence preparation.
• Handling appellate bail applications where initial relief is denied.
• Coordinating with lower courts for release orders pending high‑court adjudication.
• Advising on compliance with the High Court’s procedural directives for urgent matters.

Advocate Jaya Abrol

★★★★☆

Advocate Jaya Abrol focuses on safeguarding the liberty of individuals accused of cyber‑fraud and financial cyber‑crimes before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Her practice includes filing interim bail applications that address the High Court’s concerns regarding the potential destruction of electronic evidence. She routinely collaborates with independent cyber‑law experts to strengthen the factual matrix of the bail petition.

• Interim bail in cases of alleged cyber‑money laundering and blockchain fraud.
• Preparation of expert affidavits to contest the chain of custody of digital assets.
• Submission of comprehensive bail bonds with tailored surety conditions.
• Representation in emergency hearings to obtain immediate release.
• Drafting of conditional bail orders restricting the use of specific software.
• Guidance on filing supplementary bail petitions as investigations evolve.
• Liaising with forensic laboratories for preservation of digital evidence.

Kaviraj Law Associates

★★★★☆

Kaviraj Law Associates leverages its extensive courtroom experience to secure interim bail for clients accused of offences such as illegal interception of communications and cyber‑espionage. The firm’s litigation strategy centers on contesting the prosecution’s claim of imminent tampering with evidence, often through detailed technical submissions that satisfy the High Court’s evidentiary standards under the BSA.

• Interim bail applications for unlawful interception of electronic communications.
• Submission of technical expert opinions on the integrity of seized devices.
• Negotiation of bail terms that allow supervised access to computers.
• Filing of anticipatory bail where arrests are imminent under cyber‑surveillance statutes.
• Representation in bail revision applications before the High Court.
• Preparation of comprehensive affidavits outlining personal circumstances and risk assessment.
• Coordination with law‑enforcement agencies for timely exchange of forensic reports.

Advocate Gaurav Choudhary

★★★★☆

Advocate Gaurav Choudhary has successfully argued for interim bail in a spectrum of cyber‑crime matters, ranging from identity theft to unauthorized digital transactions. His practice in the Punjab and Haryana High Court emphasizes a thorough examination of the BNSS criteria, particularly the alleged threat to public order and the possibility of influencing witnesses in technologically sophisticated investigations.

• Interim bail for alleged identity theft involving compromised personal data.
• Strategic filing of bail petitions with detailed risk mitigation proposals.
• Expert navigation of the High Court’s urgent hearing protocols.
• Preparation of medical certificates when health concerns arise during detention.
• Representation in bail modification applications as case facts develop.
• Collaboration with cyber‑security analysts to refute allegations of data manipulation.
• Advising on statutory compliance with the BNS and BNSS during bail proceedings.

Advocate Priyanka Sekhar

★★★★☆

Advocate Priyanka Sekhar concentrates on protecting the rights of individuals facing arrest for alleged cyber‑stalking and online harassment offences. Her interventions before the Punjab and Haryana High Court often involve filing interim bail petitions that highlight the disproportionate impact of custodial detention on victims of alleged digital abuse, while also addressing the State’s concerns about evidence preservation.

• Interim bail applications in cases of alleged cyber‑stalking.
• Documentation of mitigating personal circumstances to support bail eligibility.
• Engagement with digital forensic experts to verify the authenticity of alleged evidence.
• Negotiation of bail conditions that restrict contact with alleged victims through electronic means.
• Filing of supplementary affidavits addressing evolving investigative findings.
• Representation in High Court hearings on bail extensions.
• Advising on compliance with the BNSS provisions relating to public order.

Advocate Nikhila Reddy

★★★★☆

Advocate Nikhila Reddy offers focused representation for accused persons in complex cyber‑theft and ransomware cases. Her practice before the Punjab and Haryana High Court includes filing interim bail petitions that argue the absence of an immediate threat to ongoing investigations, thereby satisfying the High Court’s requirement for an orderly release.

• Interim bail for alleged ransomware attacks on corporate networks.
• Preparation of detailed affidavits outlining the accused’s lack of control over encrypted data.
• Coordination with digital forensics firms to obtain independent analysis reports.
• Strategic use of conditional bail to limit the accused’s access to encryption tools.
• Filing of anticipatory bail where arrests are anticipated on the basis of cyber‑surveillance.
• Representation in High Court motions for bail extension or modification.
• Advising on the submission of compliance certificates under the BNSS.

Bahadur & Associates

★★★★☆

Bahadur & Associates handles interim bail matters that arise from accusations of unauthorized financial transactions through online platforms. The firm’s seasoned litigators emphasize the importance of demonstrating the accused’s cooperation with the investigation, a factor the Punjab and Haryana High Court frequently weighs when granting bail.

• Interim bail petitions in cases of alleged online fraud and money‑laundering.
• Submission of undertaking to appear before investigative authorities.
• Preparation of financial documents to support claims of innocence.
• Negotiation of bail conditions that restrict access to banking applications.
• Filing of supplementary applications to address new evidence presented by the prosecution.
• Representation in video‑conferenced bail hearings to expedite relief.
• Collaboration with forensic accountants for expert affidavits.

Prakash Law Associates

★★★★☆

Prakash Law Associates specializes in securing interim bail for individuals accused of distributing illicit content through digital channels. Their practice before the Punjab and Haryana High Court integrates a nuanced understanding of the BNSS’s public morality considerations with a robust factual rebuttal to the prosecution’s claims.

• Interim bail for alleged distribution of prohibited digital material.
• Expert affidavits challenging the authenticity of seized media files.
• Preparation of personal bonds with stipulated restrictions on internet usage.
• Negotiation of supervisory bail orders to ensure compliance with court directives.
• Filing of interim applications that cite lack of prior criminal record.
• Representation in High Court bail revision petitions.
• Advising on compliance with the BSA’s standards for digital evidence handling.

Joshi Law Offices

★★★★☆

Joshi Law Offices represents clients facing allegations of cyber‑terrorism and large‑scale data breaches. Their advocacy before the Punjab and Haryana High Court often focuses on the procedural safeguards embedded in the BNS, arguing that the gravity of the alleged offence does not, per se, preclude the grant of interim bail when the accused poses no flight risk.

• Interim bail applications in alleged cyber‑terrorism cases.
• Documentation of the accused’s residence stability and community ties.
• Engagement of cyber‑security experts to refute claims of imminent evidence destruction.
• Negotiation of bail terms that limit access to high‑risk networks.
• Filing of anticipatory bail where arrests are imminent based on intelligence inputs.
• Representation in emergency hearings before the High Court.
• Preparation of detailed risk assessment reports for court consideration.

Prakash Law Offices

★★★★☆

Prakash Law Offices offers counsel in interim bail matters concerning alleged violations of electronic communication privacy. Their practice before the Punjab and Haryana High Court includes drafting bail petitions that highlight the accused’s cooperation with forensic analysis and the absence of any prior obstruction of justice.

• Interim bail for alleged interception of private electronic communications.
• Submission of affidavits confirming the accused’s willingness to assist investigators.
• Preparation of technical expert opinions on the integrity of seized communication logs.
• Negotiation of bail conditions that restrict the use of certain messaging applications.
• Filing of supplementary bail applications to address evolving investigative scope.
• Representation in High Court motions seeking reduction of bail surety amounts.
• Advising on compliance with the BNSS’s public order considerations.

Adv. Mansi Kapoor

★★★★☆

Adv. Mansi Kapoor focuses on interim bail for individuals accused of cyber‑related intellectual property infringements. Her representation before the Punjab and Haryana High Court is marked by precise arguments regarding the non‑violent nature of the alleged conduct and the limited risk of evidence tampering.

• Interim bail applications for alleged copyright infringement on digital platforms.
• Preparation of detailed affidavits outlining the accused’s lack of access to original source code.
• Engagement of digital rights experts to discuss the proportionality of custodial detention.
• Negotiation of bail conditions that prohibit further upload of disputed material.
• Filing of anticipatory bail where investigations are in preliminary stages.
• Representation in urgent High Court hearings to secure immediate release.
• Advising on submission of compliance certificates under the BNS.

Aurora Legal Chambers

★★★★☆

Aurora Legal Chambers practices before the Punjab and Haryana High Court in matters involving alleged cyber‑extortion. Their bail strategy underscores the importance of demonstrating that the accused lacks the means to continue extortionary activities while in custody, thereby satisfying the High Court’s assessment of public safety.

• Interim bail for alleged cyber‑extortion and blackmail cases.
• Preparation of financial disclosures to show inability to continue extortion.
• Expert affidavits on the technical impossibility of coordinating attacks from custody.
• Negotiation of bail conditions restricting the use of encrypted messaging services.
• Filing of anticipatory bail where the investigation is at an early stage.
• Representation in High Court bail revision applications.
• Advising on compliance with the BNSS’s considerations of public order.

Laxman Law Associates

★★★★☆

Laxman Law Associates provides defence in interim bail applications for alleged misuse of digital payment systems. Their practice before the Punjab and Haryana High Court frequently involves contesting the prosecution’s claim that the accused’s continued detention is essential to prevent further financial loss.

• Interim bail petitions in cases involving fraudulent online transactions.
• Submission of audit reports demonstrating the accused’s lack of control over payment gateways.
• Negotiation of bail terms that impose monitoring of the accused’s financial activities.
• Filing of anticipatory bail where arrests are anticipated based on transaction monitoring.
• Representation in emergency High Court hearings for immediate release.
• Preparation of affidavits detailing the accused’s cooperation with forensic accountants.
• Advising on preservation of electronic evidence under the BSA.

Advocate Arvind Sood

★★★★☆

Advocate Arvind Sood specializes in interim bail for alleged cyber‑spam and unsolicited electronic communication offences. His advocacy before the Punjab and Haryana High Court emphasizes the absence of a direct threat to public order, a key consideration under the BNSS.

• Interim bail for alleged violations of anti‑spam regulations.
• Preparation of technical affidavits showing lack of large‑scale distribution capabilities.
• Negotiation of bail conditions limiting mass‑mailing software usage.
• Filing of anticipatory bail where investigations are based on electronic footprints.
• Representation in video‑conferenced bail hearings to expedite relief.
• Submission of character references and community service records.
• Advising on compliance with the BNS’s procedural requirements for bail.

Advocate Ashok Kulkarni

★★★★☆

Advocate Ashok Kulkarni focuses on interim bail for alleged violations of electronic data protection norms. His practice before the Punjab and Haryana High Court involves detailed arguments about the proportionality of detention in relation to the alleged data breach.

• Interim bail applications for alleged breach of data protection regulations.
• Expert affidavits on the integrity of stored data and chain of custody.
• Negotiation of bail terms that restrict access to affected databases.
• Filing of anticipatory bail when investigations are in nascent stages.
• Representation in urgent High Court hearings for immediate interim relief.
• Preparation of comprehensive risk assessments for the court.
• Advising on procedural compliance with the BNSS and BSA.

Jiva Law Offices

★★★★☆

Jiva Law Offices offers representation in interim bail matters arising from alleged cyber‑harassment on social media platforms. Their litigation before the Punjab and Haryana High Court highlights the need to balance the accused’s right to liberty with the State’s interest in preserving digital evidence.

• Interim bail for alleged social‑media cyber‑harassment offences.
• Preparation of affidavits detailing the accused’s non‑involvement in content creation.
• Negotiation of bail conditions restricting access to specific social‑media accounts.
• Filing of anticipatory bail where investigations are driven by user complaints.
• Representation in emergency High Court hearings for swift release.
• Engagement of digital forensics experts to verify metadata.
• Advising on compliance with the BNS’s bail provisions.

Das Legal Services

★★★★☆

Das Legal Services handles interim bail petitions for individuals accused of cyber‑related violations of electronic transaction laws. Their advocacy before the Punjab and Haryana High Court stresses the importance of presenting credible evidence of the accused’s willingness to cooperate with regulators.

• Interim bail applications for alleged infractions of electronic transaction statutes.
• Submission of compliance certificates from regulatory bodies.
• Negotiation of bail conditions that limit the accused’s involvement in electronic commerce.
• Filing of anticipatory bail where investigations are yet to culminate in a charge sheet.
• Representation in video‑conferenced bail hearings for expedient relief.
• Preparation of financial audit affidavits supporting the bail petition.
• Advising on preservation of transaction logs under the BSA.

Advocate Navin Sharma

★★★★☆

Advocate Navin Sharma focuses on securing interim bail for alleged cyber‑fraud involving online marketplaces. His practice before the Punjab and Haryana High Court involves meticulous preparation of affidavits that demonstrate the accused’s lack of direct control over the fraudulent listings.

• Interim bail for alleged fraudulent activities on e‑commerce platforms.
• Preparation of technical affidavits on the accused’s limited administrative access.
• Negotiation of bail conditions restricting future online sales activities.
• Filing of anticipatory bail where investigations are based on digital footprints.
• Representation in urgent High Court hearings for immediate release.
• Submission of character certificates and community support letters.
• Advising on compliance with BNSS criteria concerning public order.

Advocate Sasha Khandelwal

★★★★☆

Advocate Sasha Khandelwal represents clients facing interim bail applications in alleged cyber‑extortion cases involving ransomware. Her advocacy before the Punjab and Haryana High Court emphasizes the lack of direct means to continue extortionary conduct while in custody, a point that often persuades the bench to grant relief.

• Interim bail for alleged ransomware attacks.
• Expert affidavits on the impossibility of operating ransomware from custody.
• Negotiation of bail conditions limiting use of encryption tools.
• Filing of anticipatory bail where investigations are at an early stage.
• Representation in high‑court video‑conferenced bail hearings.
• Preparation of financial disclosures demonstrating inability to fund further attacks.
• Advising on procedural compliance with the BNS and BNSS.

Practical steps and timing considerations for filing an interim bail application

For an interim bail petition to be effective in the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh, the applicant must observe a strict chronology of actions. The moment of arrest triggers the duty to obtain the FIR copy, the arrest memo, and any medical report if health issues are cited. Within the first 24 hours, a copy of the police report must be presented to the magistrate, and the accused should be informed of the right to apply for bail under Section 439 of the BNS.

Immediately after release on remand, the defence should draft a petition that complies with the High Court’s practice direction for urgent applications. The petition must be titled “Interim Bail – Urgent” and include a concise statement of facts, a detailed list of grounds for bail, and an annex of supporting documents. The affidavit accompanying the petition should be sworn before a notary public and must contain a declaration of truthfulness, a summary of the alleged offence, and a pledge to appear before investigative authorities as required.

Key documents to attach include:

• Certified copy of the FIR and arrest memo.
• Medical certificate if physical or mental health concerns are raised.
• No‑objection certificate or a statement of cooperation from the investigating agency, if obtainable.
• Expert affidavit addressing the integrity of electronic evidence.
• Character certificates or affidavits from reputable community members.

The petition should request a specific form of bail—personal bond, surety bond, or a conditional order restricting the use of digital devices. The High Court often conditions interim bail on the surrender of a passport, the execution of a non‑disclosure undertaking, or the submission of periodic status reports to the court. By anticipating these conditions, the petitioner can demonstrate proactive compliance, thereby strengthening the request for immediacy.

Procedurally, the petition is filed in the Court Registry, and a copy is served on the State’s counsel. The registry then issues a notice of motion, indicating the date for oral argument. The High Court’s scheduling practice typically allows a hearing within five to seven days of filing for “urgent” matters, but the exact timeline may vary depending on the bench’s docket. It is prudent to prepare for a possible adjournment by having supplemental affidavits ready, especially if the State seeks to present additional evidence of potential tampering.

During the hearing, the counsel should focus on three pillars: (1) absence of flight risk, demonstrated through residence stability and family ties; (2) lack of likelihood of tampering with evidence, supported by expert testimony; and (3) proportionality of detention in light of the offence’s severity. The bench may ask for clarification on the accused’s access to electronic devices; the counsel must be ready to propose a monitoring mechanism, such as supervised use of a device in a designated location, to allay the court’s concerns.

If the High Court grants interim bail, the order will specify the bond amount, any surety requirements, and the conditions applicable. The accused must comply strictly; any breach can trigger immediate cancellation of bail and re‑arrest. In cases where the High Court denies the interim application, the counsel can file an appeal for revision within the same court, citing procedural irregularities or misapplication of the BNSS criteria.

Strategically, maintaining a parallel track of filing an anticipatory bail petition under Section 438 of the BNS can provide a safety net should the interim application fail. The anticipatory petition, filed before the alleged arrest, can be activated upon custody, thereby expediting relief without a separate interim hearing. Coordinating these filings requires meticulous docket management and close communication with the client to ensure all requisite documents are in order.

Finally, the counsel must keep a detailed file of all correspondence, affidavits, and court orders, as the Punjab and Haryana High Court may request additional documentation at any stage. Proper record‑keeping not only facilitates future bail applications but also safeguards the defence against procedural challenges that could undermine the interim relief sought.