The Haryana Human Rights Commission (HHRC) has taken cognisance of serious allegations of academic harassment and ideological discrimination at OP Jindal Global University (JGU), Sonepat, and has sought reports from multiple authorities, including the Additional Chief Secretary (Education), Haryana, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the Commissioner of Police, Sonepat, and the Registrar of JGU.
The action follows a complaint filed by Vishav Bajaj, father of Vikhyaat Bajaj, a first-year undergraduate student at the Jindal School of Design and Architecture, who alleged that his son was targeted and victimised for expressing views favourable to the Government of India, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Indian Army within an academic setting.
Notably, BJP MP Naveen Jindal, the founding Chancellor of JGU, is also a member of the university’s governing council, as per information available on the university’s official website.
In his complaint, Vishav Bajaj stated that on November 7, 2025, during a lecture on the course ‘Politics of Representation’, taught by Sarover Zaidi, repeated remarks were made that were allegedly politically derogatory, inflammatory and deeply disturbing.
According to the complaint, Prime Minister Narendra Modi was allegedly compared to Adolf Hitler, national security operations were dismissed as “gimmicks” and “branding exercises”, civilian casualties were trivialised, and official narratives on terrorism were openly questioned in class. Bajaj claimed that audio recordings of the lecture, purportedly substantiating these claims, were submitted to the authorities.
He further stated that his son raised objections responsibly and constitutionally, using established institutional grievance redressal mechanisms rather than engaging in any disruption.
The controversy deepened in another course titled ‘Modern South Asia’, taught by Dr Ekta Chauhan, where students were allowed to analyse films or books through academic themes. Bajaj said his son chose to review the film “URI: The Surgical Strike”.
However, instead of an academic critique, Vikhyaat was allegedly publicly humiliated in class, told that such content would not be accepted, failed arbitrarily, and subsequently debarred from appearing in examinations, the complaint claimed.
Following a formal complaint to the university’s Vice-Chancellor, the matter was reviewed by Executive Dean Prof Badrinarayanan Srinivasan on November 14, 2025. After personally evaluating the student’s work, the Executive Dean awarded B+ grades in all three internal assessments and ordered the recall of the debarment, providing temporary relief to the student.
Despite this intervention, Vishav Bajaj alleged that on November 29, 2025, a charge of unfair means was levelled against his son during an online jury. He said the student immediately acknowledged an inadvertent mistake, apologised, and submitted corrected work.
“Despite assurances from faculty members that the issue would attract only a minor penalty, the matter was escalated,” Bajaj said.
The complaint further alleged that during an in-person meeting on December 9, 2025, the Executive Dean pressurised the student to withdraw his complaint, warned him that he had “4.5 years remaining” and that “anything can happen”, instructed him not to inform his parents, questioned his character and treated him as a culprit. The student was subsequently declared failed in Projection Drawing, the father alleged.
In an order dated January 16, 2026, HHRC member Deep Bhatia recorded that the father had submitted that his son was suffering from mental and physical distress, living under constant fear of retaliation, academic failure and institutional victimisation for raising grievances.
“The matter has to be reported to the authority concerned, including the police, but no action has been taken by the authorities,” the order noted, directing concerned departments to submit detailed reports.
