Haryana Law Officer Appointments Reveal Pattern of Political Nepotism
The Indian Express Finds Many Appointees Are VIP Relatives, Despite Court Warnings
July 28, 2025
An investigation by The Indian Express has revealed that many of those appointed as law officers by the Haryana government are relatives of politicians and bureaucrats, including Vikas Barala, son of a senior political leader and an accused in a sexual harassment case. This points to a pattern of political patronage and nepotism in appointments to public legal offices, despite judicial warnings against such practices and the need for merit-based selection.
The report identifies several newly appointed law officers who are directly related to VIPs. Vikas Barala, named Assistant Advocate General, is the son of former Haryana Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) chief Subhash Barala and is currently facing trial in a high-profile 2017 stalking case, according to the newspaper.
Others appointed include the daughter-in-law of a former Director General of Police, the son of a serving district judge and the kin of ruling party politicians and senior administrative officers.
These appointments were made by the office of the Advocate General of Haryana, which has discretion in selecting law officers to represent the state. While the official process involves empanelment, no standardised or publicly transparent criteria appear to have been followed in assessing professional qualifications or experience.
The nomination of Vikas Barala in particular drew criticism, as he is facing trial in a case involving the stalking of Varnika Kundu, a woman he allegedly pursued in Chandigarh while she was driving alone. The case had caused national outrage in 2017 and remains unresolved. Barala was granted bail, but the charges are pending, raising concerns over propriety in his selection as a state legal representative.
The Supreme Court in State of Punjab v Brijeshwar Singh Chahal (2016) had already cautioned against politicised appointments to the post of government counsel. The Court held that appointments of state law officers (like Assistant Advocate General or Deputy Advocate General) must comply with Article 14 of the Constitution, requiring fairness, objectivity, and non‑discrimination. The Court found that Punjab and Haryana made such appointments arbitrarily, without realistic assessment, selection committees, eligibility norms or consultation with the High Court’s Chief Justice.
The Court also noted that such appointments must not be left entirely to the discretion of the political executive or the Advocate General, as they risk compromising the objectivity of legal representation for the state.
The office of the Advocate General plays a critical role in state governance. Law officers not only appear in court but also advise the government on matters of legal policy, constitutionality and litigation strategy.
Appointing a person who is under trial for a serious criminal offence to a legal advisory role within the state erodes public trust in the justice system. It gives the impression that political access can shield individuals from consequences and even provide them a platform within the very system tasked with upholding the law. This normalises a structure where legality is subordinate to power, and where eligibility for public office is determined by association rather than accountability.
The recurring presence of family members of sitting officials and politicians in public legal roles suggests a deeper systemic issue. It creates a closed circuit of opportunity in which posts are distributed within a small network of elites, excluding those without such access. This not only affects the quality and diversity of legal representation but also discourages independent professionals who are not politically connected from aspiring to these roles.
From an administrative standpoint, this violates the principle of a professional, politically neutral public service.
The Haryana case is only one example in a larger pattern where legal and constitutional roles are treated as extensions of party machinery. This damages the credibility of the state, the legal profession and the idea of impartial public service.
You have just read a News Briefing by Newsreel Asia, written to cut through the noise and present a single story for the day that matters to you. Certain briefings, based on media reports, seek to keep readers informed about events across India, others offer a perspective rooted in humanitarian concerns and some provide our own exclusive reporting. We encourage you to read the News Briefing each day. Our objective is to help you become not just an informed citizen, but an engaged and responsible one.
