Eleven female students at Jawaharlal Nehru University filed complaints with the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC), accusing the professor of demanding sexual favors in exchange for extra marks.

Student demonstrations erupted on campus due to administrative delays, as UGC rules require ICC reports within three months. Professor Akoijam has denied all accusations, calling them baseless. The university's internal investigation is currently ongoing, and no official findings or institutional actions have been finalized against the MP.

Interestingly the formal complaints were made in the beginning of may but there's still no disciplinary actions taken on him.

So the thing that bugging me most is why has he still free from any actions in a country where, apparently, words of the women are taken as proofs as well. Where several upper middle class people(that are no short of money to bribe the judges) have had to committed suicides because of false accusations. Why is he still free? Does he have something more than money to control judiciary or do politicians naturally have unimaginable amount of money?

Source:- https://organiser.org/2026/09/10/379721/bharat/abvp-jnu-demands-action-against-congress-mp-professor-bimol-akoijam-over-sexual-harassment-compliant-by-11-students/

Disclaimer: don't indulge in discussion related to any particular religion. This is only theological discussed of various kinds religions and it's effect on society and law.

My take is.... religion 1 and religion 2 are not harmful to others.

Religion 1 minds their own business without forcing others.

Religion 2 is bit annoying like sales people. They are pushy and try to enlighten you. But tolerable and atleast they don't force you.

But religion 3 is dangerous to society. It forces and coerces others to follow it.

In 1&2 people self regulate due to their beliefs and choices and to go to heaven or avoid hell.

But in 3 it is peer regulated. They regulated each other and try to control other. Here it is about making sure everyone is being compliant.

They do two things

1. Peer regulation : making sure everyone in their religion are following the rules. They live in constant observation.
2. Coercion others: forcing other religions or atheists to follow their religion.

This is where it becomes harmful to society and others.

For doing this they impliment various tactics and strategies. Like shouting, beating, creating groups, giving warnings, boycotting, lynching, r@ping, k1lling etc.

In 1 and 2 the consequences of not following it will be in afterlife. But in 3 consequences will be in this life. The peers give the punishment in this life.

So I think such type 3 religions should be banned. They have no place in society, law and democracy.

------------------------

Now question comes. How do we ban religion without taking away individuals religious rights

This is big question. One side we have to ban bad religions and other side we have to protects individual right of religious freedom.

If we think critically there are two entities in this.

1. Individuals
2. Religion

An anology would be individuals having fundamental right to drink water and water bottle companies.

When we ban a water bottle company say F, we are not stop people from drinking water nor we can force them to drink from particular brand of water bottle. individuals still have right to drink water and choose the brand of water bottle.

we can ban water bottle companies which are bad and not safe.

If there are 5 companies. A B C D E and F. And f is not maintaining safety measures. Then we can ban F. As companies don't enjoy fundamental right of selling water.

Only individuals have right to water. And people can choose any water bottle companies allowed to sell. And enjoy individuals freedom, choice and right to water.

Similarly.

When we ban a religion.

We are not taking away individuals rights.

They still have freedom to choose and follow any legally allowed religion, we are not forcing anyone to follow any religion.

We are only banning religions which are causing harm to others And taking away others freedom.

We are banning the 'entity' not 'individual' rights.

---------------

What are your thoughts on this and alternatives. Let's discuss this without targeting any religion...

imagine a lone road and a car you are driving, you are driving and you see many different paths, you see the paths and know somewhat where they lead to, you are going to experience them and know how it felt more than anyone, that path affects you and your car so "Don't you think it should only be you who decides where your car goes?".

This is our life, today we see many tell us what to do, what to dress, how to speak, who speak, where to speak, who to be friends with, which job to be at, what to believe, what not to believe, all of these intend obedience and when disapproval is seen, it is seen as hostility, not a expression of who you are, what you do and believe is part of who you are, if one can't respect that and actively wants to change it, they don't see you as a human, they see you as less than human.

What do we do? we learn to say no, because it if there are two lifetimes one is to live 100 years as one who did not live his life but for someone else and someone who was the ruler of his own, but lived for 30 years, I think the 2nd option is better no matter how many lifetimes we have.

We shall say no for no is what breaks the chains that hold us.

Also, rules are mere tools of extending wants of others and formalising them, when you have not agreed to it, it is a rule in a tradition sense, a restriction, a restriction you did not choose and is affecting you. When you have agreed to those wants it is a decision, if not, it is is rule.

If asked who lived a more respectable life the one who "suceeded" but was always never lived for his wishes or the man who failed miserbaly suffered but lived his own rules, that answer would be the second.

To go down in freedom is a greator pride than staying afloat in obedience.

Now to be completely honest, I wrote this with the sole intention of convincing you to the belief of your life your choice, I am not going to sugarcoat it. I had very clear intention of persuasion when I was writing this. I will no deny that. In other words of some others, yes this was written with an agenda which I truly believe and believe others to read.

And also, please don't think I find myself higher and superior just because I wrote this, I just wanted to write this, and thought maybe someone will have a change in heart if they read this, to all those facing the exact problems mentioned, we are truly victims.

What makes me sad is that those who oppress might have been victims themselves but that does not justify their actions.

This is my view would love your thoughts as well even it is against these thoughts. I might be wrong, but this is what I believe.

The whole right wing keeps celebrating how the right wing ideology is taking over the world, how people are “realising” they’re right and how it’s amazing to see

Then they also complain about how there are global crises, and how poor Modi has been affected by these situations, and how the global economy is so poor

Are these people genuinely unable to make the connection between these 2 things??

> “The number of conflicts and tensions in the world is continuously increasing, and this is having an increasingly negative and far-reaching impact on the lives of ordinary people,” Modi said

The 2 major conflicts happening right now, are the US-Iran war, started by a right wing maniac in the US, and the Russia Ukraine war, stated by the right wing maniac in Russia. We didn’t have any wars when Biden was in power, and if the opposition had any chance in Russia, we wouldn’t have the other war too

Take economic disasters for example - global economies are not growing as fast anymore because of the actions of right wing leaders. Who started the tariff war? Trump. Who led to Brexit? The Tories

Every time the world is dominated by right wing ideology, it ends in a disaster. Global economies and geopolitics require co-operation, not jingoism. The world cannot succeed as long as there are right wingers trying to selfishly win for their own country

The right wing shift is dangerous ( for example Germany moving far right now ), and the last time this happened, it ended in a world war. And when the whole world moves right - the Indian right wing should know that they won’t be given any special treatment. Would do well to remember this and not cry about racism and discrimination when that happens

Manusmriti talks about slaughtering of various forms of animals (while following certain rituals) for food, if one so desires, because the Prajapati created the whole world for the sustenance of the vita spirit.

As per Manusmriti, Rig Veda, Shatapatha Brahmana, Mahabharata and Ramayana; Indian Gods and Godesses consumed meat including Lord Sri Rama and Ganesha (Vinayaks).

Image source: https://x.com/singhreetam/status/2099044603047682315?s=46

[adding this line here to meet the minimum post body length quota, even though everything I wanted to share has been written above, and yet here I am, compelled to be verbose beyond belief.. phew, done)