Question

In which famous case this issue had come up. Whether the advocate had committed a professional misconduct and is guilty of the offence of the criminal contempt of the Court for having interfered with and obstructed the course of justice by trying to threaten, overawe and overbear the Court by using insulting, disrespectful and threatening language.

• A. Vinay Chandra Mishra, In Re
• B. Ex -Capt. Harish Uppal V. Union of India
• C. Hikmat Ali Khan v. Ishwar Prasad Arya and ors
• D. None of the above

Hint:

For Professional Ethics, remember the leading cases for different types of misconduct: \textit{Vinay Chandra Mishra} (contemptuous behaviour towards a judge), \textit{Harish Uppal} (lawyers' strikes), and \textit{P.D. Gupta v. Ram Murti} (misconduct involving property dealings).

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

The fastest route here is to match the conduct described, using threatening and insulting language to overawe a judge, against what each case is actually known for.

1. Vinay Chandra Mishra, In Re: Known precisely for an advocate using intimidating, disrespectful language against a judge to pressure a favourable order, treated by the Supreme Court as both professional misconduct and criminal contempt. This is an exact match.
2. Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal v. Union of India: Known for the rule against lawyers' strikes and court boycotts, an entirely different subject.
3. Hikmat Ali Khan v. Ishwar Prasad Arya and ors: Known for physical assault by an advocate on an opposing party, not verbal intimidation of the bench.
4. None of the above: Excluded since the first case matches directly.

Matching the described conduct to its source case confirms the correct answer is Vinay Chandra Mishra, In Re.

Answer 2

A further check is to look at what remedy the Supreme Court actually granted in each case, since the remedy given reveals whether the conduct was treated as contempt combined with misconduct.

1. Vinay Chandra Mishra, In Re: The advocate here was held guilty of criminal contempt for scandalizing and obstructing the court through intimidating conduct, and the Court imposed both a sentence for contempt and a suspension of his licence to practice, showing that his conduct was treated as both contempt and professional misconduct simultaneously, exactly as the question describes.
2. Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal v. Union of India: The remedy fashioned there addressed collective action by the Bar, namely strikes and boycotts, and did not concern intimidation of a judge by an individual advocate.
3. Hikmat Ali Khan v. Ishwar Prasad Arya and ors: The remedy there addressed disciplinary consequences for a physical assault, a different kind of misconduct from verbal intimidation of the court.
4. None of the above: Not applicable since the remedy pattern in the first case matches the question's facts.

Since only the first case combines a finding of criminal contempt with professional misconduct arising from intimidating the court, the correct answer is Vinay Chandra Mishra, In Re.