Jawaharlal Nehru University has dismissed Professor Angomcha Bimol Akoijam, a sitting Congress Lok Sabha MP, following an internal inquiry into sexual harassment allegations. Eleven female students had filed complaints in May 2026 regarding professional misconduct. Akoijam has strongly denied these claims, labeling the investigation a witch hunt and calling for the evidence to be made public, while the university cited civil service rules in its termination order.
Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) has officially terminated the services of Professor Angomcha Bimol Akoijam, who currently serves as a Member of Parliament representing the Inner Manipur constituency. The university's decision follows an internal committee inquiry into allegations of professional misconduct and sexual harassment raised by students earlier this year.
The administrative action comes after complaints were filed in May 2026 by 11 female students from the Centre for the Study of Social Systems. The students alleged that they were subjected to inappropriate remarks and advances by the professor during his tenure at the institution. Following these complaints, the university initiated a formal inquiry process through its Internal Committee to examine the validity of the claims.
In its dismissal order, the university administration formally invoked Rule 11(ix) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, which governs the conduct and disciplinary procedures for central government employees. The university has stated that the termination follows the findings and recommendations submitted by the inquiry committee.
Professor Akoijam has consistently and publically rejected the findings of the internal investigation. He has described the entire process as a witch hunt, arguing that the allegations are unfounded and malicious. He has further demanded that the evidence collected by the inquiry committee be made public, asserting that transparency is necessary to address what he characterizes as an attempt to damage his professional reputation.
The situation remains a point of contention, with the university standing by its administrative process while the professor challenges the legitimacy of the outcome. The development has drawn attention due to the high-profile nature of the individual involved, who holds both academic and legislative positions. As the matter continues, the primary point of interest will be whether the dismissal leads to further legal challenges or escalates into broader institutional debates regarding the procedures used by university internal committees to handle complaints of this nature.