The office of the hon’ble Lieutenant Governor of Delhi has issued a press release on Friday, in which some important facts have been hidden and some incorrect allegations have been levelled about the elected government of Delhi.
Though the office of hon’ble LG had on Wednesday merely mentioned about having rejected the parole application of Sh. Om Prakash Chautala on 5 October, the latest press release, however admits a critical fact for the first time that in the meeting between Home Minister Mr Satyendar Jain and the hon’ble LG on 21 October, the issue of latest parole application of Sh Chautala was discussed.
This makes it clear that on Wednesday and Thursday, the office of hon’ble LG in its press release chose to be selective with facts and did not reveal this critical fact.
Series of press releases issued from the office of the hon’ble LG appear to be selectively omitting crucial facts about the parole application of Sh Chautala and the pressure exerted on the Delhi government for helping him.
According to the latest press release issued by the office of the hon’ble LG, it has been now admitted that he did mention to Mr Jain about the pending parole request of Sh Chautala on 21 October, however the question that has not been answered is how did the hon’ble LG know that another parole application had been filed by Sh Chautala when the file had not even reached him ?
The office of the hon’LG has also alleged that Mr Sayendar Jain wanted withdrawal of cases registered against some leaders of his party.
It is regrettable that the office of hon’ble LG has tried to mislead by not placing entire facts about the procedure being followed since 2008.
The facts are as follows :
Compoundable cases against political leaders/workers are never withdrawn on executive orders but through a screening committee. The constitution of such a screening committee is as follows:
1. Principal Secretary – Home
2. Principal Secretary – Law
3. Joint Commissioner of Delhi Police (law and order)
4. Director of Prosecution
The cases that are considered by this committee are generally those of a political nature and hence related to political dharnas, agitation, defacement of property and are not serious/heinous crimes.
The work done by this committee is continuous in nature; it has met 13 times in the last five years and processed 141 cases.
It is clear that no minister is involved in this process, therefore the office of the hon’ble LG has erred in making this incorrect allegation.
In its meeting on 4 September 2015, the above mentioned committee met and 34 cases were placed before it for consideration. Out of these 28 were recommended for withdrawal of prosecution, two cases had already been discharged by the concerned court and four were rejected.
Out of 28 cases recommended for withdrawal of prosecution, the office of the hon’ble LG has only focused on one particular party – the AAP.
Prominent names from Congress and BJP whose cases were recommended for withdrawal from prosecution are:
Sh. Mukesh Sharma
Sh. Vijay Goel
Sh. Parvesh Verma
Sh. Vijendra Gupta
Sh. Jagdish Mukhi
Sh. Ramesh Bidhuri
The committee merely recommends that compoundable cases are fit for withdrawal and the final decision wrests with the judiciary, therefore the office of the hon’ble LG has made an unsuccessful attempt to divert attention from the real issue of Sh Chautala’s parole.
It is pertinent to add that there are 4,000 plus such compoundable cases for withdrawal, which will help in reducing pendency in courts.
The government is actively considering a proposal that the entire proposal be decentralized and a committee be formed under each of the 11 revenue
districts comprising the concerned district:
3. Chief Prosecutor
4. SDM HQ