Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) has terminated Professor Angomcha Bimol Akoijam with immediate effect. The move follows an inquiry into sexual harassment allegations made by 11 female students. In an order dated October 9, 2026, the university confirmed his dismissal after its Internal Committee (IC) examined the complaints and recommended major punishment under the applicable service rules.
It’s a significant turn in a case that had also drawn the attention of the Delhi Commission for Women (DCW). The commission had earlier asked the university administration for a report on the complaints and the action taken on them.
Why did JNU terminate Professor Bimol Akoijam?
According to the termination order, the Internal Committee inquired into the sexual harassment allegations against Akoijam, who was associated with the Centre for the Study of Social Systems under the School of Social Sciences at JNU.
Having examined the matter, the committee recommended major punishment under the applicable service rules. The university said it had followed due process. It weighed the available facts and the committee’s report, and only then decided to dismiss the professor from service.
Vice-Chancellor Santishree D Pandit signed the order, which says the dismissal takes effect immediately. It cites UGC reference number F.91-1/2013 (TFGS)/10(1) and Rule 11(ix) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules.
What does the JNU termination order say?
Issued on October 9, 2026, the order records the university’s decision after the Internal Committee’s inquiry into the allegations against Akoijam.
It says the committee recommended major punishment in line with the relevant service rules. The university then considered the findings, followed the prescribed procedure and imposed the penalty of dismissal from service.
The operative part is plain. After following due process and considering the available facts and the Internal Committee’s report, the university dismissed Professor Angomcha Bimol Akoijam with immediate effect.
The document identifies him as a JNU employee associated with the Centre for the Study of Social Systems under the School of Social Sciences. Vice-Chancellor Santishree D Pandit signed it.
Delhi Commission for Women had sought a report from JNU
Before the termination order came out, the Delhi Commission for Women had asked the JNU administration for a report on the allegations. In September, DCW Chairperson Lata Gupta took suo motu cognisance of a video circulating on social media, in which students talked about their complaints against the professor.
The students alleged in the video that they’d submitted a complaint to JNU Vice-Chancellor Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit in May 2026. They claimed no appropriate action was taken at the time.
The commission gave the university three days to submit a report. It wanted details of the action taken on the complaint, and whether the matter had been referred to the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC), which is constituted under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act.
The DCW also asked whether the complaint had been placed before the committee and what action followed. If nothing had been done, the university was to explain the reasons for the delay.
The commission’s notice directed the university to submit an Action Taken Report (ATR), along with the relevant details.
DCW calls for timely and fair action on complaints
The Delhi Commission for Women stressed that sexual harassment complaints from women and students must be handled fairly, promptly and sensitively, in accordance with the law and established procedures.
Its stated objective was to make sure complaints were examined through due process, and that administrative delays or inaction didn’t keep complainants from reaching justice.
The commission also said it would examine the report JNU submitted. Based on the facts and findings on record, it would take any further necessary action in accordance with the law.
What happens next in the JNU case?
JNU’s October 9 order confirms that the university’s Internal Committee conducted an inquiry and recommended major punishment. The professor was then dismissed from service with immediate effect.
The case has drawn attention to the procedures universities follow when they address sexual harassment complaints, and to why such matters should go through established institutional mechanisms.
It also highlights the role of oversight bodies like the Delhi Commission for Women, which seek accountability and updates from institutions when complaints are raised.
The termination of Professor Angomcha Bimol Akoijam is a major development in the sexual harassment case at Jawaharlal Nehru University. The university said its decision followed an Internal Committee inquiry and a consideration of the findings under the applicable service rules. The case also underlines why timely action, fair procedures and accountability matter when institutions handle sexual harassment complaints.
