Key Defenses Against Contempt Charges in Criminal Cases Before the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh

Contempt of court in criminal proceedings is a sui generis offence that straddles procedural discipline and the preservation of judicial authority. In the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh, the issue acquires added complexity because the court’s supervisory jurisdiction over lower tribunals and investigative agencies is exercised with rigorous adherence to the procedural code (BNS) and the evidence law (BNSS). A charge of contempt—whether civil or criminal—can jeopardise the liberty of an accused, the credibility of witnesses, and the strategic posture of the defence. Hence, meticulous handling of the evidentiary record and a nuanced understanding of statutory defences become indispensable.

The High Court’s contempt jurisdiction is frequently invoked when a party allegedly disobeys a specific direction, delays compliance with an order, or makes a public statement that threatens the administration of justice. In criminal matters, the stakes are amplified: a contempt conviction may attract imprisonment, fines, or both, and may also be used to undermine the primary defence against the substantive charge. Consequently, practitioners counsel their clients to adopt evidence‑centric arguments that prioritize the integrity of the trial record, the precise wording of the order, and the contemporaneous context of any alleged breach.

In the Chandigarh High Court, the bench carefully scrutinises the provenance of the alleged contemptuous act. The court requires clear, contemporaneous documentary evidence—such as the original order, communication logs, or recorded statements—before sustaining a contempt charge. A failure to produce that evidential foundation can itself be a potent defence, as the burden of proof rests on the prosecution to establish the contempt beyond reasonable doubt.

Given the procedural rigour of the High Court, defence strategies that hinge on evidentiary sensitivity, procedural timing, and the precise articulation of statutory defences are the most effective. The following sections dissect the core legal issue, outline criteria for selecting counsel adept in this niche, and present a curated roster of practitioners who regularly navigate contempt matters before the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

Understanding Contempt of Court in Criminal Proceedings before the Punjab and Haryana High Court

Contempt of court is codified under the relevant provisions of the BNS, which classifies contempt into two broad categories: civil contempt, which relates to the non‑compliance with a judicial direction, and criminal contempt, which involves conduct that scandalises the court or obstructs the administration of justice. In criminal trials, the High Court frequently encounters criminal contempt when an accused, a witness, or a third party makes a public statement that contravenes a prohibitory order, or when a litigant deliberately flouts a procedural directive issued in the course of the trial.

Statutory defence of lack of knowledge—One of the primary defences recognised by the High Court is that the accused did not possess knowledge of the order or direction at the material time. The defence requires the production of evidence such as delivery receipts, service records, or electronic metadata demonstrating that the order was either not received or was received after the alleged contemptuous act. Cases decided by the Chandigarh bench have underscored that a mere presumption of knowledge is insufficient; the defence must be substantiated by a chain of custody of the order.

Defence of bona‑fide compliance—Even when an order is known, a party may argue that the conduct was undertaken in good faith to comply with the order as interpreted. Evidence here includes internal memos, court‑filed motions seeking clarification, or contemporaneous notes indicating the party’s attempt to satisfy the order’s requirements. The High Court evaluates the reasonableness of the interpretation against the literal wording of the order and the procedural history of the case.

Procedural defences based on jurisdictional overreach—The High Court has occasionally dismissed contempt applications where the initiating party failed to establish that the order was within the court’s jurisdiction. For example, a contempt petition based on a lower‑court order that was later vacated or stayed by the High Court cannot serve as a basis for contempt. The defence therefore hinges on producing the ultimate judicial determination and any related interim orders.

Defence of statutory privilege—When the alleged contemptuous act involves a statement made in a protected forum—such as a parliamentary proceeding, a legislative committee, or a privileged investigation—the defence of privilege may apply. The High Court requires a careful analysis of the scope of the privilege under the BSA, supported by the official record of the proceeding, to demonstrate that the communication was immune from contempt sanctions.

The evidentiary sensitivity of these defences is paramount. The High Court demands original documents, authenticated electronic communications, and, where relevant, expert testimony on the authenticity of digital evidence. Any reliance on secondary copies or hearsay is likely to be rejected, reinforcing the need for a rigorous evidentiary strategy from the outset of the defence.

Selecting a Lawyer Skilled in Contempt Defence before the Punjab and Haryana High Court

Given the intricate interplay of procedural law, evidentiary rules, and the substantive criminal context, selecting counsel with demonstrated experience in contempt matters before the Chandigarh bench is a strategic imperative. Candidates should exhibit a track record of filing and successfully opposing contempt petitions, familiarity with the High Court’s procedural nuances, and an ability to marshal documentary and electronic evidence in accordance with BNSS standards.

Effective lawyers in this niche typically maintain a dedicated criminal litigation docket, regularly appear before the bench, and possess an acute understanding of the court’s expectations regarding procedural propriety. They should also demonstrate competence in drafting precise motions for clarification, affidavits of service, and detailed compliance reports—documents that often determine the outcome of contempt proceedings.

Prospective counsel should be vetted for their proficiency in negotiating with the bench to obtain protective orders, their skill in presenting evidentiary objections, and their capacity to advise clients on the tactical timing of disclosures. Those who have successfully navigated the High Court’s evidentiary thresholds—particularly in relation to electronic evidence preservation—are best positioned to safeguard a client against an adverse contempt finding.

Best Lawyers Practising Contempt Defence before the Punjab and Haryana High Court

SimranLaw Chandigarh

★★★★★

SimranLaw Chandigarh maintains a vibrant practice before the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh as well as the Supreme Court of India, handling complex contempt matters that arise in criminal contexts. The team applies a rigorous evidentiary audit to each case, ensuring that orders are authenticated, service records are precise, and any alleged breach is examined against the statutory language of the BNS. Their approach often involves filing detailed affidavits of service and seeking interlocutory orders to clarify ambiguous directives, thereby pre‑empting contempt allegations.

• Preparation of authenticated copies of High Court orders and service receipts for contempt petitions.
• Drafting and filing of motions seeking clarification of ambiguous directives under BNS.
• Compliance audit reports that demonstrate bona‑fide efforts to adhere to court orders.
• Strategic challenges to criminal contempt applications based on jurisdictional defects.
• Expert testimony on the admissibility of electronic communications in contempt proceedings.
• Representation in interlocutory hearings concerning alleged contempt in criminal trials.
• Assistance with filing privileged statements under BSA exemptions.

Advocate Divya Rawat

★★★★☆

Advocate Divya Rawat concentrates on criminal defences that intersect with contempt proceedings in the Chandigarh High Court. She systematically reviews the service trail of each court direction, employing forensic data recovery techniques to verify timestamps and delivery logs. Her practice emphasizes the defence of lack of knowledge, substantiating claims with electronic metadata and sworn affidavits that trace the flow of information between parties and the court.

• Forensic analysis of electronic service logs to establish knowledge gaps.
• Preparation of sworn affidavits detailing receipt or non‑receipt of court orders.
• Drafting of applications for stay of contempt proceedings pending evidentiary clarification.
• Representation in hearings addressing alleged breaches of procedural orders.
• Preparation of detailed compliance matrices aligning actions with court directives.
• Strategic use of statutory privilege defenses for statements made in protected forums.
• Advice on preservation of digital evidence in anticipation of contempt allegations.

Nair Legal Solutions

★★★★☆

Nair Legal Solutions leverages its extensive criminal litigation experience to defend clients accused of contempt in the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The firm prioritises the defence of bona‑fide compliance, assembling contemporaneous internal communications, draft motions, and minutes of meetings that illustrate a genuine effort to obey court orders. Their evidentiary dossiers often include expert assessments on the practicability of the order under prevailing procedural constraints.

• Compilation of internal memoranda demonstrating attempts at compliance.
• Expert analysis on feasibility of court directives within procedural timelines.
• Drafting of interlocutory applications seeking clarification of ambiguous orders.
• Preparation of affidavits detailing steps taken toward compliance.
• Challenges to contempt allegations based on procedural irregularities.
• Submission of statutory interpretations supporting defence under BNS.
• Representation in contempt hearings focused on evidentiary gaps.
• Advice on coordinating with lower tribunals to mitigate contempt risks.

Mehra & Jha Law Associates

★★★★☆

Mehra & Jha Law Associates handles high‑stakes criminal matters where contempt allegations arise from public statements or media interactions. Their defence strategy often involves invoking the privilege of freedom of speech within the confines of BSA, supported by transcripts of the statements, contextual analysis, and precedents from the High Court. They meticulously cross‑examine prosecution witnesses to isolate any misinterpretation of the alleged contemptuous conduct.

• Preparation of transcript‑verified copies of public statements for privilege analysis.
• Legal research on BSA exemptions applicable to speech in criminal proceedings.
• Cross‑examination briefs aimed at discrediting alleged contempt assertions.
• Drafting of privilege‑assertion motions before the High Court.
• Compilation of media reports and contextual documentation supporting defence.
• Strategic filing of interlocutory applications to stay contempt proceedings.
• Advisory memos on the limits of permissible public commentary during criminal trials.

Sinha & Verma Law Firm

★★★★☆

Sinha & Verma Law Firm emphasizes a procedural defence grounded in the High Court’s own orders. By scrutinising the chronology of each directive, they identify opportunities to argue that the alleged contempt occurred prior to the issuance of the relevant order, thereby nullifying the criminal contempt claim. Their evidentiary file typically includes docket extracts, calendar entries, and timestamps from the court’s electronic filing system.

• Chronological mapping of court orders against alleged contempt acts.
• Extraction of docket entries and filing timestamps from the High Court’s e‑filing portal.
• Preparation of timeline affidavits establishing the sequence of events.
• Filing of pre‑emptive motions challenging the temporal basis of contempt allegations.
• Analysis of procedural rules governing the commencement of contempt liability.
• Representation in hearings focused on timing and jurisdictional scope.
• Strategic advice on post‑order compliance documentation.

Ranjit Singh & Co.

★★★★☆

Ranjit Singh & Co. brings a seasoned perspective to contempt defences that arise from alleged non‑compliance with procedural directions in criminal investigations. Their practice includes drafting detailed compliance reports that are contemporaneously filed, thereby creating a contemporaneous record that can be produced to counter contempt accusations. The firm’s expertise extends to negotiating protective orders that limit the disclosure of sensitive investigative material.

• Drafting and filing of contemporaneous compliance reports under BNS.
• Negotiation of protective orders to safeguard investigative material.
• Preparation of sworn statements on the status of compliance at each stage.
• Strategic filing of interlocutory applications seeking clarification of procedural steps.
• Representation before the High Court on disputes over the adequacy of compliance.
• Advisory services on preservation of evidence to pre‑empt contempt claims.
• Coordination with investigative agencies to align compliance with court expectations.

Advocate Ruchi Mishra

★★★★☆

Advocate Ruchi Mishra focuses on defences that hinge upon statutory privilege and the right against self‑incrimination. In contempt matters where an accused is alleged to have refused to produce evidence, she builds a defence by invoking the privilege under BSA, supported by detailed affidavits and expert testimony on the legal repercussions of compelled self‑incrimination. Her practice also includes filing of stay applications to halt contempt proceedings pending a full hearing on privilege issues.

• Preparation of affidavits asserting privilege against self‑incrimination under BSA.
• Expert testimony on the legal implications of compelled testimony.
• Filing of stay applications pending determination of privilege issues.
• Drafting of detailed submissions outlining statutory privilege jurisprudence.
• Representation in High Court hearings addressing alleged refusal to produce evidence.
• Strategic coordination with counsel for lower courts to ensure consistent privilege claims.
• Advisory memos on navigating privilege defenses during criminal trials.

Advocate Kunal Iyer

★★★★☆

Advocate Kunal Iyer is adept at handling contempt petitions that arise from alleged breaches of confidential court orders. He meticulously audits the chain of custody for confidential documents, ensuring that any alleged breach is examined against the documented security protocols. His defence often includes a forensic audit of the document handling process, coupled with a statutory analysis of confidentiality obligations under BNS.

• Forensic audit of confidential document handling procedures.
• Preparation of chain‑of‑custody logs for confidential court orders.
• Statutory analysis of confidentiality obligations under BNS.
• Drafting of compliance certifications attesting to adherence to security protocols.
• Filing of motions contesting contempt on the basis of procedural safeguards.
• Representation in High Court hearings focusing on confidentiality breaches.
• Advice on implementing robust confidentiality measures to mitigate contempt risk.

Chandrasekhar Legal Services

★★★★☆

Chandrasekhar Legal Services offers a forensic‑oriented defence against contempt where the allegation hinges on alleged falsification of evidence. Their team conducts independent forensic examinations of documents, digital files, and forensic reports to establish authenticity. By producing expert reports that refute claims of fabricated evidence, they provide a robust defence that aligns with the High Court’s evidentiary standards.

• Independent forensic examination of challenged documents.
• Preparation of expert reports contesting allegations of evidence falsification.
• Submission of authenticated copies of electronic records to the High Court.
• Strategic filing of applications challenging the admissibility of purportedly falsified evidence.
• Representation in hearings focusing on the authenticity of evidence.
• Advisory services on preserving the integrity of evidentiary material.
• Coordination with forensic experts to secure credible testimony.

Patel, Singh & Partners

★★★★☆

Patel, Singh & Partners specialise in defending against contempt claims that arise from procedural delays. They craft detailed procedural calendars that map every filing, hearing, and order, thereby demonstrating that any alleged delay was either justified or resulted from factors beyond the client’s control. Their submissions often reference High Court precedents that recognize excusable delays under BNS.

• Creation of detailed procedural calendars documenting all court interactions.
• Submission of affidavits explaining reasons for any filing delays.
• Reference to High Court precedents on excusable procedural delays.
• Filing of interlocutory applications seeking extensions or clarification.
• Representation in contempt hearings focusing on alleged procedural non‑compliance.
• Strategic advice on managing court timelines to avoid contempt exposure.
• Coordination with court clerks to confirm receipt dates of critical documents.

Khan & Dhawan Attorneys

★★★★☆

Khan & Dhawan Attorneys bring a nuanced approach to contempt defences involving alleged non‑cooperation with investigative agencies. They prepare comprehensive liaison logs that record all communications with investigating officers, demonstrating a pattern of cooperation. Their evidentiary strategy includes producing certified copies of correspondence and filing affidavits that attest to full compliance with investigative directives.

• Compilation of liaison logs documenting communications with investigators.
• Certified copies of correspondence evidencing cooperation with investigative agencies.
• Affidavits confirming compliance with investigative directives.
• Filing of applications challenging contempt allegations based on alleged non‑cooperation.
• Representation before the High Court on disputes over investigative compliance.
• Strategic counsel on managing investigative requests to pre‑empt contempt claims.
• Advice on preserving investigative records for evidentiary purposes.

Gupta, Kaur & Associates

★★★★☆

Gupta, Kaur & Associates focus on defending clients accused of contempt through alleged breach of secrecy orders in criminal cases. Their practice includes drafting precise statutory compliance statements that reference the exact language of the secrecy order, and providing evidence of adherence such as encryption logs and access control records. They argue that any alleged breach is speculative unless the prosecution can produce concrete proof of unauthorized disclosure.

• Drafting of statutory compliance statements aligning with secrecy orders.
• Production of encryption logs and access control records as proof of compliance.
• Legal research on High Court interpretations of secrecy order breaches.
• Filing of motions contesting contempt based on alleged unauthorized disclosures.
• Representation in hearings evaluating the sufficiency of prosecution evidence.
• Advisory services on secure handling of confidential case material.
• Coordination with IT forensic experts to validate security measures.

Kesar Law & Advisory

★★★★☆

Kesar Law & Advisory offers expertise in defending against contempt accusations that arise from alleged non‑appearance before the High Court. Their defence strategy includes producing medical certificates, travel logs, and court‑issued notices to establish a legitimate reason for non‑appearance. They also file interlocutory applications requesting adjournments based on genuine impediments, thereby neutralising the contempt charge.

• Submission of medical certificates and travel documentation justifying non‑appearance.
• Preparation of affidavits confirming receipt of court notices.
• Filing of adjournment applications with supporting evidence.
• Reference to High Court case law on excusable non‑appearance.
• Representation in contempt hearings focusing on the legitimacy of absence.
• Strategic advice on maintaining communication with the court to avoid contempt.
• Coordination with bail‑bond agents to ensure court attendance.

Azim & Co. Lawyers

★★★★☆

Azim & Co. Lawyers specialise in defending against contempt claims predicated on alleged violation of court‑imposed reporting obligations. They meticulously prepare periodic compliance reports that are filed within the stipulated timelines, each accompanied by a sworn verification clause. Their practice also includes filing clarification petitions when the reporting requirement is ambiguous, thereby limiting the scope for contempt allegations.

• Preparation of periodic compliance reports filed in accordance with court timelines.
• Sworn verification clauses affirming accuracy of reported information.
• Filing of clarification petitions addressing ambiguous reporting directives.
• Strategic use of statutory interpretation under BNS to narrow reporting scope.
• Representation in High Court hearings assessing compliance adequacy.
• Advisory memos on best practices for court‑ordered reporting.
• Coordination with auditors to ensure report reliability.

Advocate Dhruv Choudhary

★★★★☆

Advocate Dhruv Choudhary focuses on contempt defences arising from alleged obstruction of court‑appointed experts. He assembles comprehensive interaction logs, expert engagement letters, and correspondence that illustrates full cooperation with appointed experts. By producing these records, he demonstrates that any alleged obstruction is unfounded, aligning with the High Court’s insistence on evidentiary substantiation.

• Compilation of interaction logs with court‑appointed experts.
• Preparation of engagement letters confirming expert cooperation.
• Submission of correspondence evidencing timely provision of requested information.
• Filing of motions contesting contempt based on alleged obstruction.
• Representation in hearings focusing on expert‑related compliance.
• Strategic advice on managing expert communications to avoid contempt risk.
• Coordination with expert witnesses to ensure procedural alignment.

Wagle & Co. Advocates

★★★★☆

Wagle & Co. Advocates provide a defence centred on the technicalities of service of court orders. They meticulously verify service records, postal receipts, and electronic acknowledgment logs to establish whether the order was lawfully served. If service defects are identified, they file applications to set aside contempt proceedings on the ground of improper service, a defence recognized by the Chandigarh High Court.

• Verification of service records, postal receipts, and electronic acknowledgments.
• Preparation of affidavits contesting the legality of order service.
• Filing of applications to set aside contempt proceedings on service defects.
• Reference to High Court rulings on service adequacy for contempt liability.
• Representation in hearings scrutinising the service process.
• Strategic advice on establishing proper service channels for future orders.
• Coordination with court clerks to confirm service dates and methods.

Advocate Rajesh Singh Chauhan

★★★★☆

Advocate Rajesh Singh Chauhan concentrates on defending clients against contempt allegations arising from alleged non‑disclosure of assets during criminal investigations. He constructs detailed asset disclosure statements, supported by certified valuation reports and bank statements, to demonstrate full compliance with court‑mandated disclosure obligations. His approach often includes filing interlocutory applications for clarification where the scope of disclosure is disputed.

• Preparation of comprehensive asset disclosure statements with certified valuations.
• Submission of bank extracts and financial documents evidencing disclosure.
• Filing of clarification applications concerning the breadth of required disclosure.
• Strategic reliance on High Court precedent regarding asset disclosure compliance.
• Representation in contempt hearings assessing the adequacy of disclosed assets.
• Advisory memos on maintaining accurate financial records for court orders.
• Coordination with forensic accountants to validate asset information.

Suryavanshi Legal Services

★★★★☆

Suryavanshi Legal Services specialise in defending against contempt allegations that stem from alleged breach of bail conditions imposed by the High Court. Their defence strategy includes drafting detailed compliance logs that track each bail condition, producing verification certificates from supervising authorities, and filing motions to modify or clarify conditions that are ambiguous or impracticable.

• Creation of compliance logs tracking adherence to each bail condition.
• Verification certificates from supervising officers confirming condition fulfilment.
• Filing of motions to modify or clarify ambiguous bail conditions.
• Reference to High Court jurisprudence on bail‑condition contempt.
• Representation in hearings evaluating alleged bail‑condition breaches.
• Strategic counsel on proactive communication with bail‑granting authorities.
• Advice on documentation practices to prevent future contempt accusations.

Yashika Law & Consultancy

★★★★☆

Yashika Law & Consultancy provides defence against contempt claims that arise from alleged non‑compliance with court‑ordered community service or rehabilitation programmes. They gather attendance registers, supervisor reports, and certificates of completion to prove that the client fulfilled the mandated programme. When discrepancies arise, they file applications seeking clarification and, where necessary, a re‑evaluation of the service record.

• Collection of attendance registers and supervisor reports for community service.
• Preparation of certificates of completion for rehabilitation programmes.
• Filing of clarification applications addressing discrepancies in records.
• Strategic reference to High Court decisions on community‑service contempt.
• Representation in hearings evaluating compliance with service orders.
• Advice on maintaining continuous documentation of programme participation.
• Coordination with programme administrators to ensure accurate record‑keeping.

Deshmukh & Co. Advocates

★★★★☆

Deshmukh & Co. Advocates focus on contempt defences related to alleged non‑adherence to court‑issued restraining orders in criminal matters. Their practice includes producing GPS logs, witness affidavits, and police reports that either corroborate compliance or reveal procedural lapses in the prosecution’s evidence. They argue that without concrete proof of breach, the contempt charge cannot survive the High Court’s strict evidentiary standards.

• Acquisition of GPS logs and location data to verify compliance with restraining orders.
• Preparation of witness affidavits attesting to the client’s conduct.
• Submission of police reports that evaluate alleged violations.
• Filing of motions contesting contempt on the basis of insufficient proof.
• Reference to High Court rulings emphasizing evidentiary burden in restraining‑order contempt.
• Representation in hearings scrutinising the prosecution’s evidentiary base.
• Strategic advice on proactive compliance monitoring to avert future allegations.

Practical Guidance for Navigating Contempt Defences in Criminal Cases before the Punjab and Haryana High Court

Effective defence against contempt charges begins with immediate preservation of the evidential record. As soon as a court order is issued, secure a certified copy and document the method of service—whether physical delivery, registered post, or electronic transmission. Maintain a contemporaneous log that records the date, time, and recipient of the service, as the High Court frequently demands this chronology to assess knowledge and intent.

When a contempt allegation is raised, file an affidavit of denial or explanation within the statutory period prescribed by the BNS. The affidavit must be sworn before a notary and should attach all relevant documents—service receipts, correspondence, internal memos—that substantiate the defence of lack of knowledge or bona‑fide compliance. The affidavit serves as the primary evidentiary foundation for any interlocutory application.

Consider filing an interlocutory application seeking clarification of the contested order before the High Court. Such a petition should precisely articulate the ambiguous language, cite the relevant paragraph of the order, and request either a detailed specification or a modification. This proactive step often forces the mandatorily issuing bench to narrow the scope of the order, thereby narrowing the potential ground for contempt.

If the defence rests on statutory privilege, ensure that the privilege claim is supported by a certified transcript of the protected proceeding and a legal memorandum outlining the BSA exemption clauses. Attach expert opinions, if necessary, to demonstrate that the statement fell within a privileged sphere and did not exceed the protected bounds.

For defences predicated on procedural delays, maintain a detailed procedural calendar that includes every filing date, hearing date, and order receipt. Attach corroborating evidence such as court‑issued notices, courier receipts, and email timestamps. When a delay is unavoidable, file an application for adjournment supported by a bona‑fide justification—medical reports, travel impediments, or unavoidable procedural bottlenecks.

In cases involving confidentiality or secrecy orders, institute robust information security protocols. Retain encryption logs, access‑control records, and audit trails that can be produced as evidence of compliance. If a breach is alleged, promptly obtain a forensic audit to either confirm or refute the claim, and be prepared to submit the audit report as part of the defence.

When the alleged contempt concerns non‑appearance, secure any documentation that explains the absence—medical certificates, travel itineraries, or official summons proving receipt of the notice. File an application for condonation of non‑appearance along with the supporting documents, citing High Court precedent that recognises legitimate impediments.

Finally, maintain open and documented communication with the bench. Promptly acknowledge receipt of any contempt notice, seek clarification where needed, and demonstrate a willingness to cooperate. The High Court places considerable weight on the litigant’s attitude toward the court’s authority; a cooperative stance, backed by solid evidence, often mitigates the severity of any contempt sanction.

In summary, a successful defence against contempt in criminal matters before the Punjab and Haryana High Court requires (i) immediate preservation of the service record, (ii) meticulous documentation of compliance efforts, (iii) strategic interlocutory applications for clarification or adjournment, (iv) expert utilisation of statutory privilege and confidentiality provisions, and (v) proactive, documented engagement with the judiciary. Engaging a lawyer with specialised experience in contempt defences—such as those listed above—ensures that these procedural safeguards are expertly navigated, thereby protecting the client’s liberty and the integrity of the criminal defence.