In February, following the KIIT incident that led to the death of Prakriti Lamsal in Odisha, India, former attorney general of Nepal Yubaraj Sangroula wrote on Facebook, “The behaviour shown towards students in Bhubaneswar by KIIT is a crime... If we continue to tolerate such injustice, the entity called ‘government’ appears ineffective.”

However, allegations of sexual harassment, misogyny, bullying, homophobia, and discrimination have since emerged against Sangroula and other faculty members of the Kathmandu School of Law, where Sangroula serves as the executive director.

Sangroula dismissed the accusations against him in a press conference on Sunday: “Any government agency can investigate me, and if evidence proves I am at fault, I will wear the handcuffs myself.”

Sangroula called the allegations an attempt to tarnish his and KSL’s reputation. “Based on one person’s account on social media, people should not make judgements. If such things happen against a reputed institution with history and contributions to the legal field and the country, the country should also provide protection and think deeply about such actions and rumours,” he said.

While Sangroula suggested that he was being unfairly judged based solely on one person’s (Sandhya Gautam) account, many current and former students have come forward in solidarity with Gautam, sharing their own experiences.

A total of 152 alumni have issued a public statement demanding action and an impartial investigation. A working group of alumni has also circulated a Google document, which, as of Monday evening, had been filled by 51 individuals detailing experiences of abuse, harassment, bullying, and sexual misconduct—primarily against Sangroula, along with other faculty members.

Similarly, on Gautam’s Instagram page, where she initially shared anonymous messages, she has received over 100 confessions, all recounting experiences of abuse, harassment, homophobia, and misogyny, calling for a fair investigation.

Student’s testimonies

Aastha Dahal, a former KSL student, says she witnessed and heard about many troubling incidents during her time at KSL—both as a student and later while working on various KSL projects.

Dahal recalled instances in the classroom where misogynistic remarks were normalised, such as a professor saying, “Let’s imagine you are my wife,” or blaming women for river pollution due to shampoo use.

Another alumnus pointed out that most victims came from weaker socio-economic backgrounds. “He would first support them financially or involve them in college activities, building a ‘savior’ image. Once he gained their trust, he manipulated that power dynamic to his advantage.”

Aashma Acharya, 27, a KSL alumna (2016–2021), says a homophobic remark made by Sangroula during a first-year Hindu philosophy class has stayed with her to this day.

When he asked students who supported LGBTQIA+ rights to raise their hands, Acharya did.

In response, he repeatedly said, “Same-sex relationships are unnatural. Having sex with the same gender is like having sex with a buffalo. Tell me, Acharya, should I go and have sex with a buffalo?” The comment, repeated multiple times, left a lasting impact on her.

Another student who spoke up in favour of queer rights faced similar hostility, with Sangroula declaring, “Even if your parents come here and hang themselves, I won’t teach.” The class was suspended, and Acharya, along with a few others, was suspended for three days and forced to write an apology letter.

This was not just the experience of Acharya.

Speaking to the Post, one queer student from the third year said, Sangroula, although he presents himself as an expert and respectable figure outside, has said and done many problematic things within the college. “The mental health of many students, including me, has worsened due to the toxic environment in the college,” she said.

She also shared a clip from a KSL event where Sangroula stated, “Many times, people keep on asking why haven’t I allowed an LGBTQIA+ committee in KSL. Tell me, should I teach law to students or make them LGBT?”

Another current student shared that Sangroula once asked her to massage his back, and since it seemed like a normal occurrence at the college, she didn’t feel she could refuse. She recalled, “While I was massaging his back, he held my hands, pinched them, and caressed them, saying, ‘You give such nice massages.’ I felt extremely uncomfortable.”

Another alumnus from 2019 recounted an incident where Sangroula pulled the hair of a 19-year-old student in class while discussing a boy who had raped girls. The alumnus also claimed that Sangroula would ask female students to clean his earwax after sitting on their laps.

Demand for investigation committee

Many allegations have surfaced on social media, prompting the formation of an investigation committee.

Rubin Shrestha, head of the Information, Communication, and Student Welfare Department at KSL, confirmed that a three-member committee had been formed following an internal meeting on March 14.

The committee includes Dr Shree Krishna Bhattarai (former judge and judge representative), Tirtha Koirala (journalist representative), and Seema Dhami (alumna and student representative).

However, alumni and accusers remain dissatisfied, as the committee was formed by KSL’s managing committee, which includes Sangroula along with Gita Pathak (his wife). When asked if Sangroula is part of the managing committee, the information officer confirmed, “Yes, he is part of it, but he is not the head of the team.”

An alumnus and working group member rejected the investigation committee, stating, “We don’t accept it. Shree Krishna Bhattarai, who had to resign due to sexist remarks and mistreatment of his former wife, should not have been selected. Tirtha Raj Koirala is close to Sangroula, and Seema Dhami publicly declared Sangroula’s innocence on Facebook before the committee was formed.”

Seema Dhami’s now-deleted Facebook post read: “His [Sangraula] selfless service and hard work led to our professional success, and we students are indebted to him.”

When asked about the selection process, Koirala said, “I don’t know the criteria, but it must be because of my background in both media and law. A college representative contacted me, and I agreed to be on the committee.”

In response to concerns from alumni about the committee’s ties to Sangroula, Koirala stated, “I don’t care about Sangroula; I care about the case. The investigation will be fair. If alumni are not satisfied, they should speak to the college.”

At Sunday’s press conference, Sangroula did not clarify whether he would formally step down from his position during the investigation but said that he would not interfere in investigation matters and would fully comply with the process for a fair inquiry.

However, alumni argue that the complaint filed against Gautam on Sunday and her summons to the Cyber Bureau on Monday have dashed any hopes of a fair investigation.

Cyber Bureau spokesperson Deepak Raj Awasthi confirmed that a KSL representative had filed a complaint, but exact details were not disclosed. “The complaint concerns tarnishing of KSL’s image and reputation of its faculty, and spreading unproven allegations on social media and media outlets,” Awasthi said.

This action, the alumnus from the working group argued, silences voices like Gautam’s and reflects the power dynamics at play. While the KSL has the legal right to file a complaint, it is “morally wrong and exposes the hypocrisy” of the institution.

Alumni have also urged the Education Ministry, Purbanchal University, the Bar Council, the Bar Association, the National Women’s Commission, and responsible bodies to pursue an independent external investigation into KSL.

“Victims must formally petition either the court or the bar council. Speaking on social media alone leads nowhere. If they follow the proper legal process, we will take necessary action”, said General Secretary of the Nepal Bar Association Anjita Khanal, when asked about the association’s stance on the matter. “Victims need to come to us. We cannot seek them out ourselves”.

Shailesh Mani Pokharel, acting head of Purbanchal University’s Law Faculty, acknowledged awareness of the allegations through social and national media but stated that no formal complaints had been received.

When reminded of the solidarity statement from 152 alumni demanding a fair investigation, he emphasised that the dean’s office monitors institutions based on ethical guidelines. “We are deeply concerned and discussing possible actions,” Pokharel said.

Manisha Dhakal, executive director of Blue Diamond Society, said the organisation was previously unaware of blatant homophobia at KSL. However, after Gautam’s post, past and current queer students have reached out to them.

BDS has also issued a press release demanding accountability, a formal acknowledgment and apology, a review of discriminatory academic materials [2nd-year textbook that categorises homosexuality alongside bestiality as a sexual criminal offense], the establishment of a clear anti-discrimination policy, and mandatory sensitisation training for all staff and faculty.

Sunil Babu Pant, executive director of Mayako Pahichan who was invited to a panel talk at KSL, where Sangroula was the moderator over ten years ago, said, “Even with limited interaction, I found Sangroula’s stance on LGBTQIA issues unfriendly”.

“Through student confessions, it’s clear that KSL is homophobic and queerphobic… Dismissing allegations by linking them to USAID or other agents is an attempt to ignore the issues,” Pant added.

Sangroula and his supporters have argued that if the allegations hold any truth, victims should take their cases to court. However, alumni Aastha Dahal said, “It’s troubling to insist that every victim must go to court”

“The court is not the ultimate arbiter of truth. Our judicial system doesn’t even recognise collective claims as evidence in areas like labour law. Harassment cases on campuses don’t stand a chance, especially when powerful individuals are involved,” she argues.

Dahal stressed the importance of an external investigation committee that is attuned to current issues. “The committee should be led by a woman, include queer representation, and have members who understand Gen Z, their language, and social media dynamics. If committee members don’t understand misogyny, harassment, and homophobia, the investigation will be ineffective”.