Hundreds of BJP women workers demonstrated outside the Congress headquarters in New Delhi on October 12, demanding action against Angomcha Bimol Akoijam, the Inner Manipur MP who was dismissed from Jawaharlal Nehru University following complaints made by female students. The BJP Mahila Morcha protest came days after the university terminated Akoijam’s employment and shortly after Delhi Police registered an FIR in connection with the sexual harassment allegations.

The former JNU professor has denied wrongdoing and challenged the university inquiry, describing the process against him as a “witch hunt”. No criminal court has determined that he committed the alleged offences.

BJP Mahila Morcha Protest Over JNU Professor: What Happened Outside Congress HQ

The demonstration was held near the Congress headquarters on Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Marg and was led by BJP Mahila Morcha national president and MP Roop Kumari Choudhary. Women MPs, legislators, councillors and party workers participated in what BJP organisers called the “Nari Shakti Hunkar Andolan”. Protesters demanded that Congress expel Akoijam from the party and called for accountability over the complaints made by JNU students.

Police barricaded the road as demonstrators moved towards the Congress office. Hindustan Times reported that some protesters crossed the barricades and reached the gate, leading to a confrontation involving BJP and Congress workers. Police detained several BJP leaders, including D Purandeswari Devi, Bansuri Swaraj, Kamaljeet Sehrawat and Delhi BJP Mahila Morcha president Archana Gupta. They were later released, according to the BJP.

The BJP Mahila Morcha protest also became a political attack on the Congress leadership, with BJP speakers questioning why the party had not suspended or expelled its Inner Manipur parliamentarian. Those statements represent the BJP's political position. They do not establish the underlying allegations against the MP.

What Are the Allegations Against Angomcha Bimol Akoijam?

At least 11 female students submitted complaints in May against Angomcha Bimol Akoijam, who taught at JNU's Centre for the Study of Social Systems. According to reports based on the complaints, students alleged that he made sexually suggestive remarks during viva examinations and classes. Some complaints also reportedly referred to alleged inappropriate conduct at gatherings at his on-campus residence. One allegation reported by Times of India was that remarks were made suggesting additional marks in exchange for accepting sexual advances.

These are sexual harassment allegations, not findings by a criminal court. The complaints reportedly began after one student described an encounter in a students-only WhatsApp group, following which other students came forward. The formal complaints were submitted on May 18.

JNU Dismissed Akoijam on October 9

Jawaharlal Nehru University dismissed Akoijam with immediate effect on October 9 after considering the findings of its Internal Committee. The university order said it had followed due process and imposed dismissal from service after the committee recommended a major penalty under the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965.

Dismissal is among the major penalties available under those rules. The decision means Akoijam is now more accurately described as a former JNU professor, although some university webpages may still show older faculty information that has not yet been updated. JNU's website had listed him as a professor specialising in social and political psychology and cultural studies. His dismissal from the university does not affect his Lok Sabha membership automatically. Official parliamentary records continue to list him as the sitting Congress MP representing Inner Manipur in the 18th Lok Sabha.

Internal Committee Report Reportedly Had Dissent

An important detail is that the university inquiry was not reportedly unanimous on punishment. Times of India reported, citing official sources, that the presiding officer and other committee members favoured a major penalty, while student representatives did not sign off on that recommendation and instead supported a lesser punishment. The committee ultimately submitted its report with dissent.

This does not mean the committee rejected the complaints. Rather, according to the reporting, there was disagreement over the nature of the disciplinary penalty that should follow.

That distinction matters because claims that every committee member unanimously recommended dismissal would overstate the publicly available information.

Delhi Police Registers FIR

The controversy entered a separate criminal-law stage after JNU's chief security officer approached police. An FIR was registered at Vasant Kunj North police station on October 11.

Delhi Police officials said the case includes Sections 75, 75(1)(i), 75(1)(iv) and 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, covering allegations including sexual harassment, sexually coloured remarks and gestures or acts intended to insult a woman's modesty. Police have said the investigation is underway.

The FIR is an important development, but it does not itself prove the allegations. Investigators must gather evidence, record statements and determine whether the material supports further criminal proceedings.

Akoijam Denies Allegations and Challenges JNU Inquiry

Akoijam has strongly disputed both the accusations and the university's handling of the inquiry. After his dismissal, he described the action as a “witch hunt” and alleged procedural irregularities. He also challenged claims that he had failed to cooperate with the university proceedings. According to his statement, he submitted a written response to the complaints on May 31 and gave his deposition on July 16. He also said witnesses called on his behalf gave depositions on August 14.

Akoijam disputed a reported claim that the university or committee had sent him around 300 emails, saying he had received and responded to 43 communications from the committee. He has said his lawyers will address the case and accused the university administration and sections of the media of prejudging him. Those are his claims and have not themselves been independently established.

Why BJP Is Targeting Congress Leadership

The BJP Mahila Morcha protest focused not only on Akoijam but also on Rahul Gandhi, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra and the Congress leadership. Choudhary accused Congress of failing to act against one of its MPs despite the university dismissal. Other BJP leaders similarly argued that Congress should demonstrate its stated commitment to women's safety by taking disciplinary action against the MP. Bansuri Swaraj questioned the party's approach to accountability, while Kamaljeet Sehrawat called for an apology from Rahul Gandhi and demanded Akoijam's expulsion.

Union Women and Child Development Minister Annapurna Devi also joined the political criticism during the protest. These are partisan demands rather than legal conclusions about Akoijam's liability. As of the latest sources reviewed for this article, Akoijam remained listed by Parliament as an Indian National Congress member from Inner Manipur, and no formal party-expulsion announcement was identified.

Who Is Angomcha Bimol Akoijam?

Akoijam was elected from Inner Manipur in the 2024 Lok Sabha election on an Indian National Congress ticket. Parliamentary records identify him as having a PhD in psychology from Delhi University and list teaching and filmmaking among his professions. At JNU, his academic work covered areas including identity politics, conflict, minorities, intergroup and gender relations, popular culture and the politics of knowledge.

He became nationally visible in Parliament through interventions on the continuing crisis in Manipur. His status as both an academic and elected representative has made the present case politically significant, but those roles should remain separate when reporting the investigation. The Congress MP continues to hold elected office unless his parliamentary status changes through a separate legal, political or constitutional process.

University Disciplinary Action and Criminal Investigation Are Different

There are now three separate processes surrounding the case. First, students made complaints inside JNU. Second, the university's Internal Committee examined those complaints and JNU ultimately dismissed the faculty member. Third, Delhi Police have begun a criminal investigation following the FIR. These processes use different standards and can produce different outcomes. An employer or university can impose disciplinary action based on an internal inquiry without waiting for a criminal prosecution to conclude. A criminal case, meanwhile, requires police investigation and potentially judicial proceedings before guilt can be established. This is why describing the sexual harassment allegations as already criminally proven would be inaccurate.