The division bench of Acting Chief Justice GS Sandhawalia and Justice Vikas Bahl passed the observation while hearing a PIL filed by advocates of Punjab and Haryana High Court, alleging that Malik and HCBA secretary Swaran Singh Tiwana have misused and embezzled the funds of the association.

During the course of hearing on Thursday, the HC was told that dasti notices were issued to Malik and Tiwana, which have been received back with the report of refusal, as they said that they were not ex-president and ex-secretary.

The bench also said that when summons were sought to be served upon Malik, an incident took place which led to the lodging of FIR No. 72, dated July 1, 2024, on the statement of Ranjeet Singh, an advocate, as he was assaulted by Malik and his associates in the office of the Bar Association located on the premises of the High Court.

On perusing the FIR registered against Malik and others, the HC remarked that the “matter needs to be supervised by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Chandigarh, as certain other offences would arise from the plain reading of the FIR, which have not been mentioned”.

The bench was also informed about the injured victim/complainant, who is undergoing treatment in PGIMER, Chandigarh.

The UT counsel accepted the notice on behalf of UT and assured that the Senior Superintendent of Police, Chandigarh, will look into the matter at her own level and take appropriate steps.

The bench was also informed about the inaction of Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana on a complaint filed against the conduct of Malik and Tiwana, which pertain to defalcating and embezzling the amount. On it, the Bar Council submitted that the complaint is pending consideration and the council is proceeding ahead with the complaint filed by the petitioners against the private respondents as per the provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961.

The Benchwas further informed about a resolution which was sought to be passed at the instance of Malik to call a strike till the cancellation of the FIR. The HC on it said that, “The law has been laid down by the Apex Court in this regard that any call for strike by members of the Bar Association as such would be illegal.”

The Bench said that “In furtherance of his personal interests, Malik, has made an unsuccessful attempt to call a General House meeting for suspension of work, which however was opposed by the members of the Bar Association itself.”

The Bench on it opined that “this action of respondent No.2 (Malik) and his assaulting petitioner No.3 (complainant in the FIR-Ranjeet) amounts to interference in the administration of justice and prima facie a case of criminal contempt is made out under Section 2 (c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, whereby it has been provided that anybody who prejudices or interferes or tends to interfere with the due course of any judicial proceeding and obstructs or tends to obstruct the administration of justice in any other manner would become liable”.

The bench was informed that various complaints of sexual harassment of women advocates and women employees of the Bar Association have been received against Malik. The Bench ordered that the office of the Chief Justice, which is in receipt of these complaints, is directed to supply copies of the said complaints to the Bar Council to look into these allegations also and to proceed accordingly.

“Let the complaint, which is subject-matter of this petition, be decided within a period of ten days and respondent No.3 (Tiwana) is free to present his side of the story before the Bar Council,” said the Bench.

Regarding the other issue of sexual harassment, which has been raised against Malik and for which complaints have been received, it is open to the Bar Council to issue fresh notice to the persons concerned regarding the allegations contained in the complaints, the bench said.

The bench also clarified that “it is also open to the Bar Council to pass interim orders to ensure the sanctity and respect of the Institution, in case Malik does not co-operate…It is also open to the said respondent to furnish his apology to redeem his conduct”. The matter is now scheduled for hearing on July 15.

Bar body panel restrains Malik from acting as president

Asked by the High Court to look into the complaints against Vikas Malik and S S Tiwana, the committee of the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana Thursday restrained Malik from acting as president pending the decision on the complaints against him.

“We also direct Vikas Malik not to be seen anywhere near the office of the President/Executive/Bar Association office till the final decision of the present complaints,” ordered the Bar Council Committee.

On Thursday, the committee was told that Vikas Malik, president of HCBA, has handed over the charge of the office of the president to Jasdev Singh Brar, vice-president of the Bar Association.

The committee of the Bar Council opined that Vikas Malik, “in given circumstances has rightfully handed over the charge to the vice-president and it would be appropriate that till the present complaints are decided he should not work as president of the Bar Association and it would also help in improving the atmosphere of the Bar Association of High Court”.

The committee of the Bar Council is presided over by Karanjit Singh (chairman), Rajat Gautam (member) and Ravish Kaushik (member).

On the incident of assault of Advocate Ranjit Singh, the Bar Council committee has issued a notice to Malik and Tiwana. However, Tiwana has submitted that he is not even remotely involved in this incident. The committee, however, asked Tiwana to file reply regarding the allegation of embezzlement of funds.

The matter was adjourned for July 5, for both Malik and Tiwana to file their response.