The Delhi Police have registered a First Information Report (FIR) against Congress Lok Sabha MP and former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) professor Angomcha Bimol Akoijam following sexual harassment allegations involving 11 women students. The FIR, registered on October 11, 2026, at Vasant Kunj North police station, was filed on the basis of a complaint by JNU’s Chief Security Officer and cites findings of the university’s Internal Committee (IC).
The FIR states that a prima facie offence is made out under Sections 75, 75(1)(i), 75(1)(iv) and 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The committee reportedly identified a recurring pattern of inappropriate personal interactions, sexually suggestive conduct and unwelcome physical contact, which it said created an “intimidating, offensive, and hostile learning environment”.
JNU dismissed Akoijam from service with immediate effect on October 9, following the committee’s recommendations. However, the Congress MP has challenged the inquiry, alleging procedural lapses and describing the proceedings as a “witchhunt”. He has denied the allegations and said his legal team will pursue the matter. The police investigation now adds a criminal-law dimension to the university’s disciplinary action.
What The FIR Records
According to reports, the FIR draws on the findings of JNU’s Internal Committee, which investigated complaints of sexual harassment against Akoijam, who was associated with the Centre for the Study of Social Systems under the university’s School of Social Sciences. The complaints were reportedly filed by 11 women students, who alleged inappropriate behaviour and violations of professional boundaries in their interactions with the professor.
The committee’s findings reportedly described a recurring pattern of conduct involving inappropriate personal conversations, sexually suggestive remarks and unwelcome physical contact. It concluded that the alleged behaviour created an “intimidating, offensive, and hostile learning environment”, raising concerns about students’ safety and their ability to participate in academic activities without fear or discomfort.
The FIR invokes Sections 75, 75(1)(i), 75(1)(iv) and 79 of the BNS, which cover sexual harassment-related offences and conduct intended to insult the modesty of a woman. It states that a prima facie offence is made out under these provisions. The FIR follows the university’s internal disciplinary proceedings, although a criminal investigation and an institutional inquiry are separate processes with different legal implications.
The registration of an FIR marks the initiation of criminal proceedings and does not, by itself, establish guilt. The allegations will have to be examined through the legal process, with the investigating authorities required to assess the available evidence and statements.
Akoijam Challenges Inquiry
Akoijam has disputed the university’s handling of the proceedings and questioned whether the inquiry followed the required procedures. Calling the action against him a “witchhunt”, he has alleged procedural lapses and criticised the media coverage of the case as a “media trial”. He has also rejected references to “sex for grades”, arguing that this allegation was not part of the original complaint.
Responding to claims concerning his participation in the inquiry, Akoijam said he submitted a written response on May 31 and recorded his deposition on July 16. He added that his defence witnesses gave their depositions on August 14, 2026. These dates form part of his argument that he participated in the proceedings and should have been afforded a fair opportunity to present his defence.
He also disputed reports that approximately 300 emails had been sent to him during the inquiry, saying he had received and responded to 43. Further, he challenged Vice-Chancellor Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit’s statements concerning defence witnesses and communications, questioning the university’s account of the process.
Akoijam has said that his legal team will pursue the matter, signalling that the university’s decision and the inquiry procedure may face further legal scrutiny.
JNU, meanwhile, defended its disciplinary action. In the dismissal order dated October 9 and signed by Vice-Chancellor Santishree D Pandit, the university said it had considered the available facts and the Internal Committee’s report before imposing the penalty. The order stated that the committee had recommended major punishment under the applicable service rules and that the dismissal would take effect immediately.
Accountability And Fair Process
The case has renewed attention on how universities respond to sexual harassment complaints and protect students who report misconduct. When students raise concerns about behaviour by those in positions of academic authority, institutions have a responsibility to provide safe reporting mechanisms, protect complainants from intimidation and conduct inquiries that are fair, transparent and consistent with the law.
At the same time, disciplinary decisions and criminal allegations must be handled through established procedures, allowing evidence to be examined and all parties to exercise their legal rights. Public discussion should not turn into a trial by media, nor should demands for procedural fairness be used to dismiss or trivialise the experiences of those who report harassment. The concerns raised by the students deserve serious consideration, while the allegations against Akoijam must be determined through the appropriate legal process.
For educational institutions, the broader issue extends beyond an individual case: students must be able to learn, question and pursue their academic goals without fear of harassment or abuse of authority. Independent investigations, accountability and safeguards against retaliation are essential to building that trust.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
Every student deserves dignity, safety and equal opportunities in the classroom, irrespective of their gender or the status of the person they report. Allegations of sexual harassment must be investigated sensitively and thoroughly, with complainants treated with empathy and their concerns taken seriously. Equally, due process must be upheld so that findings are based on evidence rather than public pressure or political considerations.
Accountability and fairness are not opposing principles; both are necessary for justice. Universities must also strengthen confidential complaint mechanisms, ensure independent inquiries and communicate decisions responsibly to prevent misinformation and further harm. How can educational institutions build a culture in which students feel safe reporting harassment while ensuring that every inquiry remains fair, transparent and accountable?
STORY | FIR registered against sacked JNU professor Akoijam on sexual harassment charges Days after his dismissal as professor from Jawaharlal Nehru University, Congress MP Angomcha Bimol Akoijam has been booked on charges of sexual harassment and insulting a woman’s modesty, according to Delhi Police officials. READ: https://t.co/MOcAmd4k0M
— Press Trust of India (@PTI_News) October 12, 2026
