Navigating Judicial Bias Allegations Through Transfer Petitions in Large‑Scale Corruption Trials in Punjab – Guidance from Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh

Allegations of judicial bias in corruption prosecutions that involve substantial public assets, multi‑crore financial trails, and senior officials trigger a delicate procedural battle. When such cases are lodged before the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh, the strategic use of a transfer petition becomes a decisive instrument to safeguard the fairness of the trial and to protect the rights of the accused.

The stakes in large‑scale corruption matters are amplified by intense media scrutiny, political pressure, and the potential for precedent‑setting judgments. A transfer petition that correctly articulates bias—whether it stems from pre‑trial remarks, procedural irregularities, or perceived partiality of the presiding judge—must be framed on solid factual foundations and anchored in the procedural statutes governing criminal transfers.

In the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the procedural mechanism for seeking a change of venue is governed by specific provisions that balance the court’s discretion with the accused’s constitutional entitlement to an impartial tribunal. Practitioners must therefore master not only the drafting of the petition but also the evidentiary corroboration of bias, the timing of filing, and the interaction with lower courts and the trial judge.

Because transfer petitions intersect with other reliefs such as stays of proceedings, protective orders, and interlocutory applications, a nuanced approach that anticipates counter‑arguments from the prosecution is essential. The following sections dissect the statutory landscape, outline the criteria for selecting counsel experienced in this niche, and present a directory of practitioners who regularly handle such petitions before the Chandigarh High Court.

Statutory and procedural backdrop for transfer petitions alleging judicial bias in the Punjab and Haryana High Court

The governing framework for a transfer of a criminal trial within Punjab and Haryana lies in the provisions of the BNS that address jurisdictional realignment. Under the relevant BNS clause, a transfer may be ordered when the court is satisfied that the present venue is not conducive to a fair and impartial trial. The court evaluates factors such as the presence of local pressures, prior public statements by the judge, and any pattern of procedural deviation that could prejudice the accused.

To invoke bias, the petitioner must furnish concrete material—affidavits, transcripts of remarks, media reports, and any correspondence that demonstrates a predisposition. The BNS requires that the petition set out distinct grounds, each supported by documentary evidence, rather than relying on generalized allegations of hostility. Courts in Chandigarh have consistently emphasized the need for specificity, noting that a mere assertion of “unfairness” without factual scaffolding is insufficient for a transfer.

Procedurally, a transfer petition is filed as a special application under the BNS schedule of criminal proceedings. The filing must be accompanied by a supporting affidavit, a certified copy of the original charge sheet, and a detailed statement of facts illustrating why the present bench cannot assure impartiality. In high‑profile corruption matters, practitioners often attach excerpts from televised hearings, editorial pieces, and minutes of pre‑trial conferences that reveal bias‑inducing conduct.

Once the petition is presented, the High Court may direct the trial judge to respond to each allegation, after which a hearing is scheduled. The court may also appoint an amicus curiae to assist in evaluating the bias claim. If the court finds merit, it may order a transfer to another bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, or, in rare circumstances, to a different High Court in the country.

It is crucial to note that the transfer does not automatically stay the substantive proceedings. The petitioner must seek a provisional stay or a protective order in a separate application if there is a risk of evidentiary loss or intimidation pending the transfer order. Failure to secure such interim relief can jeopardize the effectiveness of the transfer itself.

Finally, the BNS provides for an appeal against the transfer order. The appellate venue is determined by the same criteria that justified the original transfer—principally, the need for a neutral forum. Consequently, counsel must be prepared to argue both the transfer and any subsequent appeal, ensuring continuity of the bias argument throughout the litigation lifecycle.

Key criteria for selecting counsel experienced in transfer petitions for high‑profile corruption trials

Choosing a lawyer for a transfer petition in a large‑scale corruption case is a decision that influences the procedural trajectory of the entire trial. The counsel must possess demonstrable experience before the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh, a nuanced understanding of the BNS provisions on transfer, and a track record of handling bias allegations without compromising confidentiality.

First, assess the lawyer’s exposure to complex criminal matters involving public officials, corporate entities, and cross‑border money trails. Such exposure indicates familiarity with the layers of evidence—financial statements, forensic audit reports, and statutory investigations—that often form the backbone of bias arguments.

Second, verify the attorney’s proficiency in drafting intricate petitions. A well‑crafted transfer petition weaves together legal precedent, statutory language, and a chronological narrative of bias‑inducing events. Counsel who have authored successful petitions demonstrate an ability to anticipate prosecutorial rebuttals and to frame relief requests in a manner that aligns with the High Court’s procedural expectations.

Third, examine the lawyer’s strategic approach to interim relief. Since the transfer order alone may not halt ongoing proceedings, an adept practitioner will concurrently pursue a stay of trial, a direction for preservation of evidence, or a protective order against intimidation. The ability to synchronize these applications reflects a sophisticated case‑management mindset.

Fourth, evaluate the practitioner’s network within the Chandigarh legal ecosystem. Interactions with senior judges, amicus curiae, and forensic experts often expedite the presentation of bias evidence. While networking alone does not guarantee success, a counsel who cultivates constructive relationships can more effectively navigate procedural nuances.

Finally, consider the attorney’s commitment to confidentiality and ethical standards. High‑profile corruption cases attract media attention; thus, a lawyer who maintains strict confidentiality while communicating procedural developments is essential for protecting the client’s reputation and the integrity of the bias claim.

Best criminal‑law practitioners in Chandigarh

SimranLaw Chandigarh

★★★★★

SimranLaw Chandigarh maintains a focused practice before the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh and also appears before the Supreme Court of India. The firm’s experience includes handling transfer petitions in cases where allegations of judicial bias intersect with large‑scale financial irregularities involving public procurement and state‑run enterprises. Their approach emphasizes meticulous evidence collation—combining audit reports, recorded courtroom statements, and expert forensic testimony—to construct a compelling narrative of bias. By aligning each factual allegation with the specific BNS provisions on venue change, SimranLaw ensures that the petition meets the exacting standards set by the High Court.

• Drafting and filing transfer petitions under BNS jurisdictional clauses
• Compiling affidavits and expert reports to substantiate bias allegations
• Securing interim stays of trial proceedings pending transfer determination
• Representing clients in interlocutory hearings on venue suitability
• Appealing adverse transfer orders before the High Court’s appellate bench
• Coordinating with forensic auditors for financial evidence preservation
• Advising on protective measures against witness intimidation
• Preparing post‑transfer case management strategies

Khan & Gupta Attorneys

★★★★☆

Khan & Gupta Attorneys have a long‑standing presence in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, handling complex criminal matters that require a transfer due to perceived partiality. Their docket includes cases involving multimillion‑rupee embezzlement schemes where the presiding judge has previously adjudicated related matters, creating an appearance of bias. The firm’s practitioners are adept at citing precedents from the High Court that highlight the threshold for demonstrating bias, thereby framing their petitions within a robust legal context.

• Identifying and documenting prior judicial involvement that may cause bias
• Filing transfer petitions with detailed chronological timelines of events
• Petitioning for protective custody of critical evidence during transfer
• Negotiating with opposing counsel for mutually acceptable transfer venues
• Representing clients in the High Court’s bench‑allocation hearings
• Assisting with post‑transfer relocation of trial records
• Drafting supplementary affidavits to address new bias developments
• Advising on media interaction strategies during transfer proceedings

Advocate Shreya Mookerjee

★★★★☆

Advocate Shreya Mookerjee specializes in criminal defence before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, with a focus on high‑visibility corruption investigations. She has authored several transfer petitions where alleged bias stemmed from the trial judge’s prior public commentary on the case’s political implications. Her practice emphasizes the strategic use of media excerpts and official press releases as evidentiary support for bias claims, aligning each piece of evidence with the BNS standards for transfer.

• Collecting and authenticating media publications that indicate bias
• Preparing detailed affidavits linking judicial comments to procedural prejudice
• Filing transfer petitions alongside applications for stay of proceedings
• Representing clients during oral arguments on bias before the bench
• Coordinating with reputation‑management experts for public statements
• Undertaking post‑transfer jurisdictional compliance checks
• Assisting in the preparation of cross‑examination strategies post‑transfer
• Guiding clients on preserving privilege of confidential communications

Advocate Karthik Rao

★★★★☆

Advocate Karthik Rao brings a forensic‑oriented perspective to transfer petitions in corruption trials before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. His experience includes cases where the alleged bias arose from a judge’s conflicts of interest disclosed in financial disclosures. Rao’s methodology integrates forensic accounting findings with legal arguments, ensuring that each claim of bias is substantiated by quantifiable data that meets the BNS evidentiary threshold.

• Analyzing financial disclosure statements for conflict indicators
• Integrating forensic audit reports into transfer petition affidavits
• Seeking interim injunctions to prevent evidence tampering during transfer
• Presenting statistical analyses of case outcomes to illustrate bias patterns
• Advocating for relocation of trial to a bench with no prior involvement
• Appealing adverse transfer decisions with supplementary forensic evidence
• Coordinating with forensic experts for post‑transfer evidence verification
• Advising on compliance with BNS procedural deadlines for filing

Khan Legal Associates

★★★★☆

Khan Legal Associates handles transfer petitions that arise from accusations of judicial bias in investigations led by state anti‑corruption agencies. Their practice involves dissecting procedural irregularities—such as the denial of a fair opportunity to cross‑examine key witnesses—as grounds for transfer. By mapping procedural lapses to BNS provisions, the firm crafts petitions that demonstrate how the existing bench may hinder a balanced adjudication.

• Documenting procedural lapses that affect trial fairness
• Drafting petitions that link specific procedural breaches to bias
• Filing protective orders to safeguard witness testimony during transfer
• Negotiating with prosecution for a neutral bench allocation
• Representing clients in High Court hearings on procedural fairness
• Preparing detailed chronology of case developments for the petition
• Assisting in the preparation of post‑transfer case strategy
• Monitoring compliance with court‑issued transfer directives

Sharma & Kumar Advocates

★★★★☆

Sharma & Kumar Advocates possess extensive trial experience before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, particularly in corruption matters involving public utilities. Their transfer petitions frequently cite the judge’s prior rulings in related utility‑regulation cases to argue a predisposition. The firm’s forte lies in presenting a comparative analysis of past judgments to illustrate the risk of bias, thereby strengthening the petition’s factual foundation.

• Comparative analysis of prior judgments for bias illustration
• Preparing comprehensive affidavits detailing past judicial decisions
• Filing transfer petitions with supporting case law excerpts
• Securing interim suspensions of trial proceedings during transfer review
• Representing clients in High Court bench‑allocation hearings
• Coordinating with subject‑matter experts on utility regulations
• Advising on post‑transfer evidentiary preservation strategies
• Drafting supplemental petitions to address emerging bias concerns

Advocate Pankaj Chauhan

★★★★☆

Advocate Pankaj Chauhan’s practice before the Punjab and Haryana High Court focuses on corruption investigations linked to infrastructure contracts. He routinely files transfer petitions when the presiding judge has previously acted as an arbitrator in the same sector, creating a perceived conflict. Chauhan stresses the importance of documenting every instance of the judge’s prior involvement, linking it directly to the accused’s right to an impartial forum.

• Documenting prior arbitration roles of the judge in related sectors
• Preparing detailed affidavits that trace conflict of interest pathways
• Filing transfer petitions under BNS bias provisions
• Seeking protective orders to prevent misuse of privileged information
• Representing clients during High Court hearings on conflict evidence
• Coordinating with industry experts to explain sector‑specific biases
• Ensuring compliance with procedural time‑limits for filing
• Advising on strategic communication with investigative agencies post‑transfer

Dutta & Nanda Law Chambers

★★★★☆

Dutta & Nanda Law Chambers possess a reputation for handling transfer petitions in cases where the alleged bias originates from the judge’s social affiliations with political parties under investigation. Their methodology includes gathering social media interactions, public event participation records, and donation disclosures to construct a factual matrix that satisfies BNS bias criteria.

• Collecting social‑media evidence of judge’s political affiliations
• Analyzing donation records for potential conflicts of interest
• Drafting affidavits that integrate social evidence into bias claims
• Filing transfer petitions with comprehensive evidence bundles
• Securing interim stays to protect the integrity of the trial record
• Representing clients in High Court hearings on political bias
• Coordinating with independent investigators for verification of social links
• Advising on post‑transfer procedural adjustments for case continuity

Poonam Singh & Co.

★★★★☆

Poonam Singh & Co. focuses on corporate‑related corruption cases before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, where bias may arise from a judge’s prior consultancy for the implicated corporation. Their practice highlights the necessity of uncovering contractual relationships, advisory fees, and prior legal opinions issued by the judge. By attaching these disclosures to the transfer petition, the firm emphasizes the potential prejudice to the accused.

• Tracing prior consultancy engagements of the judge with the corporation
• Gathering contract documents and fee agreements as evidence
• Preparing affidavits linking consultancy to potential bias
• Filing transfer petitions that explicitly reference BNS bias provisions
• Seeking protective orders for confidential corporate documents
• Representing clients during bench‑allocation hearings on conflict
• Collaboration with corporate compliance experts for factual verification
• Post‑transfer planning for seamless continuation of corporate defence

Saurabh & Sons Law Firm

★★★★☆

Saurabh & Sons Law Firm specializes in transfer petitions arising from allegations that the trial judge has previously delivered advisory opinions to governmental departments under investigation. Their approach includes obtaining official correspondence, meeting minutes, and written opinions to demonstrate an appearance of bias. The firm meticulously aligns each piece of correspondence with the BNS statutory framework governing transfers.

• Obtaining official advisory opinions issued by the judge
• Compiling meeting minutes that show direct interaction with investigators
• Drafting detailed affidavits correlating advisory work to bias
• Filing transfer petitions with supporting documentary annexures
• Requesting interim stays to prevent undue influence on ongoing evidence
• Representing clients in High Court hearings assessing advisory bias
• Coordinating with governmental liaison officers for verification
• Strategic post‑transfer case management to address new bench dynamics

Parth & Associates

★★★★☆

Parth & Associates brings a meticulous focus on procedural bias, such as irregularities in the issuance of summons or selective application of procedural safeguards. Their transfer petitions often cite instances where the trial judge deviated from established BNS procedural timelines, thereby compromising the accused’s right to a fair hearing. By documenting each procedural deviation, the firm builds a compelling case for relocation.

• Documenting irregularities in summons issuance and service
• Analyzing deviations from prescribed BNS procedural timelines
• Preparing affidavits that link procedural lapses to bias
• Filing transfer petitions that emphasize systemic procedural unfairness
• Seeking interim protective orders to halt further procedural mishandling
• Representing clients in hearings focused on procedural integrity
• Coordinating with court clerks to verify procedural records
• Planning post‑transfer procedural safeguards to avoid recurrence

Das Legal Advisors

★★★★☆

Das Legal Advisors focuses on transfer petitions where the alleged bias stems from a judge’s public participation in seminars or panels discussing the very subject matter of the corruption case. Their practice includes compiling event programs, video recordings, and speaker biographies to demonstrate a vested interest that may affect impartiality. By integrating these materials into the petition, the firm satisfies the evidentiary threshold required by the BNS.

• Gathering event programs and speaker lists where the judge participated
• Obtaining video recordings of judge’s public statements on the case topic
• Drafting affidavits that connect public engagement to potential bias
• Filing transfer petitions with multimedia evidence annexures
• Requesting interim stays to preserve the integrity of the trial record
• Representing clients in High Court hearings on public‑interest bias
• Coordinating with media monitoring agencies for verification
• Developing post‑transfer strategies to address any residual perception issues

Sarita Law Solutions

★★★★☆

Sarita Law Solutions has extensive experience handling transfer petitions that arise from alleged bias due to a judge’s familial connections with individuals named in the investigation. Their investigative approach includes tracing family trees, reviewing property records, and examining any financial ties that could create an appearance of partiality. These findings are woven into the petition to meet the BNS criteria for bias.

• Mapping familial relationships between the judge and investigation subjects
• Reviewing property and financial records for potential conflict
• Preparing affidavits that detail familial links and their relevance
• Filing transfer petitions that explicitly reference BNS bias provisions
• Seeking protective orders to shield sensitive familial information
• Representing clients in bench‑allocation hearings addressing familial bias
• Coordinating with genealogical researchers for accurate data
• Advising on post‑transfer confidentiality protocols

Khosla Law Advocates

★★★★☆

Khosla Law Advocates concentrates on transfer petitions where bias is alleged due to the judge’s prior role as a regulatory authority official in the sector under investigation. Their practice involves securing prior decision‑making records, circulars, and policy drafts authored by the judge, then linking those documents to a perception of favoritism toward the prosecution. The firm aligns each document with the statutory framework of the BNS to reinforce the transfer request.

• Obtaining regulatory decisions authored by the judge
• Collecting policy drafts and circulars showing sector involvement
• Drafting affidavits that tie regulatory actions to bias claims
• Filing transfer petitions with comprehensive regulatory evidence
• Requesting interim orders to prevent prejudicial use of regulatory material
• Representing clients in High Court hearings on regulatory bias
• Collaborating with sector experts to contextualize regulatory influence
• Strategic planning for post‑transfer case presentation to a neutral bench

Advocate Kiran Lamba

★★★★☆

Advocate Kiran Lamba’s practice in the Punjab and Haryana High Court emphasizes transfer petitions where bias is evident from the judge’s prior involvement as an expert witness in related investigations. By securing transcripts of expert testimony, remuneration records, and correspondence, the advocate constructs a factual matrix that satisfies the BNS bias threshold. The focus remains on demonstrating how prior expert participation could compromise impartial adjudication.

• Securing transcripts of the judge’s prior expert testimony
• Obtaining remuneration and engagement letters for expert work
• Preparing affidavits linking expert testimony to perceived bias
• Filing transfer petitions with detailed expert evidence annexes
• Seeking interim stays to prevent reliance on prior expert opinions
• Representing clients during hearings on expert‑related bias
• Coordinating with independent experts to counterbalance prior testimony
• Post‑transfer strategy to address any lingering perception of bias

Heritage Law Chambers

★★★★☆

Heritage Law Chambers handles transfer petitions that arise from alleged bias due to a judge’s sustained involvement in community organizations that are parties to the corruption dispute. Their investigative process includes reviewing membership rosters, meeting minutes, and public statements made by the judge in that capacity. By integrating these elements into the petition, the firm meets the evidentiary standards set by the BNS.

• Reviewing membership rosters of community organizations linked to the case
• Collecting meeting minutes that show judge’s active participation
• Documenting public statements made by the judge in community forums
• Drafting affidavits that correlate community involvement to bias risk
• Filing transfer petitions with comprehensive community evidence
• Requesting interim orders to safeguard the trial from community influence
• Representing clients in High Court hearings focused on community bias
• Developing post‑transfer protocols to ensure neutral community interaction

Poonam & Priya Legal Services

★★★★☆

Poonam & Priya Legal Services specializes in transfer petitions where bias is alleged because the judge has previously authored academic articles critiquing the anti‑corruption framework under which the case proceeds. Their approach involves gathering the published articles, citation analyses, and peer reviews to demonstrate a pre‑existing stance that may affect impartiality. The firm aligns these scholarly works with BNS bias provisions.

• Collecting academic articles authored by the judge on anti‑corruption law
• Analyzing citations and peer reviews for indications of bias
• Preparing affidavits linking scholarly positions to potential prejudice
• Filing transfer petitions with academic evidence as annexes
• Seeking interim protective orders to prevent reliance on scholarly bias
• Representing clients during High Court hearings on academic bias
• Coordinating with legal scholars to contextualize the judge’s viewpoints
• Strategic post‑transfer planning to mitigate any residual bias perception

Advocate Vijayalakshmi Menon

★★★★☆

Advocate Vijayalakshmi Menon focuses on transfer petitions where alleged bias stems from the judge’s previously adjudicated civil disputes involving the same corporate entities now facing criminal charges. Her practice entails extracting civil judgment extracts, settlement agreements, and related correspondence to illustrate a familiarity that could influence criminal scrutiny. These documents are methodically linked to the BNS bias criteria.

• Extracting civil judgments involving the same corporate parties
• Gathering settlement agreements and related correspondence
• Drafting affidavits that correlate civil familiarity with bias risk
• Filing transfer petitions with civil law evidence annexed
• Seeking interim orders to prevent civil‑law bias from affecting criminal trial
• Representing clients in High Court hearings on cross‑jurisdictional bias
• Coordinating with civil litigation experts for factual verification
• Post‑transfer strategy to ensure criminal proceedings remain distinct

Advocate Devesh Chandra

★★★★☆

Advocate Devesh Chandra’s practice includes transfer petitions that allege bias due to the judge’s historical involvement in policy‑making committees overseeing the sector under investigation. By obtaining committee reports, meeting agendas, and voting records, the advocate demonstrates a policy‑making role that may predispose the judge toward a particular outcome, thereby meeting the BNS bias standards.

• Obtaining committee reports and policy drafts authored by the judge
• Collecting meeting agendas and voting records indicating policy stance
• Preparing affidavits that connect policy involvement to bias concerns
• Filing transfer petitions with policy documents as evidence
• Requesting interim stays to prevent policy bias from influencing trial
• Representing clients during High Court hearings on policy‑related bias
• Collaborating with policy analysts to contextualize committee work
• Developing post‑transfer safeguards against policy‑influenced judgments

Mukherjee Law Associates

★★★★☆

Mukherjee Law Associates handles transfer petitions where bias is alleged from the judge’s prior role as a legal adviser to the state department overseeing the investigation. Their methodology includes retrieving advisory opinions, legal memoranda, and correspondence that demonstrate a close working relationship with the prosecutorial authority. These pieces are integrated into the petition to fulfill BNS bias evidentiary requirements.

• Retrieving advisory opinions issued by the judge to the state department
• Collecting legal memoranda and correspondence linking judge to prosecution
• Drafting affidavits that illustrate advisory role as bias source
• Filing transfer petitions with advisory documents annexed
• Seeking interim protective orders to shield trial from advisory influence
• Representing clients in High Court hearings on adviser‑bias claims
• Coordinating with former department officials for corroboration
• Strategic post‑transfer planning to maintain procedural independence

Practical guidance: timing, documentation, and strategic considerations for filing a transfer petition alleging judicial bias

Effective use of a transfer petition begins with early identification of bias indicators. Practitioners should maintain a contemporaneous log of any judge‑related statements, prior engagements, or procedural irregularities that surface during the pre‑trial phase. This log becomes the backbone of the affidavit that accompanies the petition.

The procedural clock for filing a transfer petition in the Punjab and Haryana High Court is governed by BNS provisions that require the application to be presented “as soon as practicable” after the bias becomes apparent. Courts have interpreted this to mean within thirty days of the first material indication of bias, unless a justified extension is sought. Delaying beyond this window risks dismissal on the ground of undue lethargy.

Documentary preparation must be exhaustive. Apart from the standard affidavit, the petition should attach:

• Certified copies of any public statements, media articles, or video recordings of the judge that demonstrate bias.
• Extracts of prior judgments, advisory opinions, or regulatory orders authored by the judge in the relevant sector.
• Correspondence showing the judge’s involvement in events, committees, or entities linked to the case.
• Financial disclosures or property records that reveal potential conflicts of interest.
• Expert reports that evaluate the impact of the alleged bias on the fairness of the trial.

Strategically, the petition should be framed not only as a request for transfer but also as a plea for interim relief—such as a stay of proceedings or a protective order—to prevent the trial from advancing while the bias issue is adjudicated. Filing a combined application reduces the risk of the trial proceeding unchecked, which could prejudice the eventual transfer.

During the High Court hearing, counsel must be prepared to articulate a clear causal link between the documented bias and the risk of an unfair trial. Reference to specific BNS clauses, prior High Court pronouncements on bias, and comparative case law strengthens the argument. Anticipating the prosecution’s rebuttal—typically centered on the claim that bias is “perceived” rather than “actual”—requires pre‑emptive inclusion of objective evidence that moves the bias claim from speculation to demonstrable fact.

In the event that the High Court denies the transfer, the petitioning lawyer should be ready to file an appeal under the BNS appellate provisions within the prescribed period, preserving the same evidentiary record and, if necessary, supplementing it with any newly discovered bias material. Throughout the appellate process, maintaining the original petition’s structure and evidentiary foundation is critical for persuasive continuity.

Finally, post‑transfer considerations include ensuring the seamless handover of trial records, re‑orienting witness protection measures to the new bench, and revisiting procedural timelines that may have been affected by the transfer. Counsel should draft a post‑transfer checklist that addresses these operational aspects, safeguarding the client’s rights from the moment the transfer order is issued through to the resumption of the substantive trial.