The punishment of fine given to him by the high court is set aside. The full bench of the high court may still consider whether to continue the honour of Senior Advocate conferred on him in light of the findings recorded in this judgment,' the bench ruled.

What angered the bench to the extent of considering enhanced punishment for Anand was the fact that during his trial at the high court, he had gone to the extent of hurling reckless allegations against one of the judges, Justice Manmohan Sarin, and demanding that he abandon the hearing.

The apex court bench noted: 'Anand's action in trying to suborn the court witness in a criminal trial was reprehensible enough but his conduct before the high court aggravates the matter manifold.'

'He does not show any remorse for his gross misdemeanour and instead tries to take on the high court by defying its authority. We are in agreement that the punishment given to him by the high court was wholly inadequate and incommensurate to the seriousness of his actions and conduct. We, accordingly, propose to issue a notice to him for enhancement of punishment,' the bench said.

'We also hold that by his actions and conduct Anand has established himself as a person who needs to be kept away from the portals of the court for a longer time. The notice would, therefore, require him to show-cause why the punishment awarded to him should not be enhanced as provided under section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act. He would additionally show-cause why he should not be debarred from appearing in courts for a longer period,' the bench said.

Section 12 of the Contempt of Court Acts 1971 envisages punishments in terms both the jail term and monetary fine.

'The second part of the notice would also cure the defect in the high court order in debarring the appellant from appearing in courts without giving any specific notice in that regard as held in the earlier part of the judgment,' the bench ruled.