Following claims of financial misbehavior against a former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) instructor, the Central Bureau of Investigation has started fresh inquiry. About 88.11 lakh rupees were misappropriated in one of his projects. Initially brought up when the university pointed out inconsistencies in its financial records, the issue is now being more closely investigated by the CBI. 

Along with five others including university administrators and support staff, A. L. Ramanathan, a former professor at the School of Environmental Sciences at JNU, has been named as the major criminal. Other suspected participants include computer operators Nazir Hussain and. Ritesh Kumar, project assistant K. Murali, section officers Sneh Rajora Asiwal and Urmil Punhani. Following the discovery of financial anomalies of more than 88 lakh rupees at the university, an FIR was registered in February 2022 at the Vasant Kunj North Police Station. Among these were altered use certificates, fictitious sums in project ledgers, and payments unable to be explained. 

When the Vice-Chancellor of JNU brought the matter before the Finance Committee after finding inconsistencies in the drafting of the university’s 2021 balance sheet, the situation worsened. Following that, the Committee formed a fact-finding team that reportedly found in its inquiry that regular and contract employees as well as outsourced employees all were handled. was equally complicit in the financial misbehavior. The fact-finding committee put the stated amount abused to be ₹88,10,712. 

JNU sidelined Ramanathan in 2021 after the inconsistencies became apparent, and his resignation from his job has since been approved. Rising pressure in the substance, most notably Delhi’s Lieutenant Governor V. K. Saxena’s agreement in July 2025, caused the probe to formally go to the CBI. Formal investigation by the CBI started on September 8 when it filed its case under its purview. 

The charges go beyond easy calculations. The fact-finding team said the totals in the ledgers for several projects were off, perhaps in order to simplify unlawful payments. Some use certificates—papers that projects send in to show how their money has been spent—have been changed, it is said. The case has also resulted in requests for criminal charges against vendors believed to have supplied phony notes using shell companies as well as their blacklist.

Though the exact initiatives and timelines most affected are still being confirmed, university sources say the funds were earmarked for projects. under Both internal and external audits are under consideration to guarantee full accountability as well as Ramanathan’s supervision. Several funders have also been informed about the problem, it is said. 

This case is of interest both because of the amount of the money involved and because of problems with institutional governance. Experts in educational administration contend that misuse of project funds harms public, national as well as international cooperative projects’ reputation. Universities weaken confidence in research organizations. Transparency has stressed the need for appropriate controls and balances in grant allocation and use, especially when portions of research money are placed trust. supporters to certain members of the faculty who may have significant administrative power. 

Regular, contract, and external personnel participation suggests that the alleged financial misappropriation could have exploited several channels inside the university’s administrative and fiscal system. Observers say it might create a precedent for how accountability is managed in Indian institutions, especially regarding project, if the claims are proven. how fund audits, vendor contacts, and utilization certificates are confirmed. 

At this stage, the CBI would most likely want financial papers, bank statements, project reports, vendor invoices, and utilization certificates. The people listed in the FIR could be questioned; forensic audits may be carried out to follow the direction of funds. The legal processes are ongoing, and although the defendants are regarded innocent until proven guilty, the transfer to the CBI shows how seriously these claims are being taken. 

As part of the path forward, the CBI will collect evidence, verify claims made by the fact-finding committee, and pinpoint any flaws in institutional oversight. The institution and funding sources might start performing internal audits meanwhile to prevent such events from reoccurring. For many viewers, the event stresses the need of awareness in research funding and the role of accountability systems in universities.