The LG, being a constitutional position, has misused his office to provide benefit to O.P. Chautala, in both May 2015 as well as on October 2015

A day after the Delhi government accused him of pressuring a Minister, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) filed a formal complaint against Lieutenant Governor Najeeb Jung for what it claimed was an attempt to ‘shield’ incarcerated ex-Haryana Chief Minister Om Prakash Chautala, with its anti-graft unit.
A contingent of senior party representatives, which included Greater Kailash legislator Saurabh Bhardwaj and national spokespersons Ashutosh and Raghav Chadha, filed the complaint with ‘the LG-appointed’ chief of the Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB) Mukesh Kumar Meena on Saturday afternoon. Satyendar Jain, Minister of Home, filed a similar complaint against Mr. Jung with Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s office on Friday.
Claiming that their complaint pertained to 'an extremely serious matter of corruption', the AAP leaders, in their complaint, argued that Mr. Jung's 'personal' intervention in relation to a routine parole matter was 'rather strange' and an attempt to provide 'benefit' to a convict who had been convicted and awarded 'exemplary punishment on serious grounds of corruption' by the judiciary.
“The LG, being a constitutional position, has misused his office to provide benefit to Mr. OP Chautala, in both May 2015 as well as on October 2015. There concerns about quid-pro-quo in the dealings of Parole of Mr. OP Chautala and the role of LG needs to be thoroughly probed,” they stated in their complaint. Mr. Chautala is behind bars at west Delhi's Tihar Jail after being convicted in the JBT Scam.
Providing a time-line of the events as they are alleged to have unfolded in regard to the contentious parole application filed on behalf of the 84-year-old Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) chief, the complainants claimed that Delhi's Minister for Home, Satyendar Jain, had adviced the rejection of an application requesting the extension of his parole back in May this year as it had seemed 'unwarranted' in view of the fact that he had 'enjoyed a parole of many weeks' in April.
This, the complaint further argued, was followed by a similar request for parole, this time on the grounds of the 'serious illness of a family member' in the month of September which was also rejected by Mr. Jain since a minimum period of six months, which Prison Rules mandate must elapse before parole can be considered afresh for a convict, had not elapsed.
In October, a fresh parole application was filed on behalf of Mr. Chautala on medical grounds. This time, however, the leaders claimed in the complaint, Mr. Jung 'exercised pressure on the Home Minister' asking him to grant parole to the incarcerated Haryana politician on the grounds that he had been 'a five time President of a political party'.
The complaint also questioned the proceedings of a press briefing, during which Mr. Jung's official representative, on his behalf this Friday, accepted that the file pertaining to Mr. Chautala's parole had reached Raj Niwas on October 28 and, hence, implying, before formally admitting, that the LG 'had information about the parole request through informal channels'.
According to a senior ACB official, the complaint against the LG 'had been received' and was 'being verified before the registration of a preliminary enquiry (PE)' was formally initiated.