Haryana BJP MP’s Son Removed as AAG

Haryana In a significant turn of events that has sparked widespread public attention, the son of a BJP Member of Parliament in Haryana has been removed from his newly appointed position as Additional Advocate General (AAG). The decision to revoke his appointment came after serious allegations emerged accusing him of stalking the daughter of a senior Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer.

The young woman, who belongs to a respected bureaucratic family, reportedly informed authorities that she was being followed and harassed by the BJP MP’s son. The complaint immediately triggered alarm among top administrative circles and eventually made its way into the public domain, sparking outrage and demands for immediate action.

The Haryana government, facing intense scrutiny and public backlash, swiftly responded by cancelling the appointment. Sources in the administration confirmed that the state’s top leadership intervened after the matter escalated, particularly because of the sensitivity around the involvement of an IAS officer’s family.

Legal experts and members of the civil society welcomed the move, stressing that key government positions like that of Additional Advocate General must be held by individuals of unquestionable character. Several senior lawyers pointed out that such appointments should always go through rigorous background checks, irrespective of political affiliations or influence.

The controversy has also brought into sharp focus the challenges women face even in the most powerful and privileged sections of society. The alleged victim, being the daughter of a senior bureaucrat, had the courage and support to speak out — something many women often lack in similar situations. Her stand, many say, could inspire others to come forward and not tolerate harassment in silence.

The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party has so far maintained a studied silence on the issue. While the party has not made any official statement, political observers believe that the cancellation was a damage-control move aimed at preventing further erosion of public trust, especially in a politically charged environment.

Many in the bureaucracy and the legal community believe this case could be a defining moment in ensuring more transparency in appointments and a greater emphasis on ethical qualifications. A senior retired judge commented that if allegations like these are proven, they should permanently disqualify a candidate from holding any position of public responsibility.

Meanwhile, the young woman’s family has reportedly decided not to pursue the matter further legally, possibly satisfied that the appointment has been rescinded. But the incident continues to raise eyebrows and ignite conversations around privilege, power, and accountability.

As the political dust settles, one thing is clear: this episode has sent a strong message. Positions of power are not meant to shield anyone from consequences, and public sentiment can no longer be ignored in an age where information spreads instantly. In a democracy, ethical leadership and public accountability remain non-negotiable, even for the most politically well-connected individuals.