In late December 2025, King George's Medical University (KGMU) in Lucknow was pulled into a high-stakes crisis: a junior resident doctor accused a senior resident doctor of sexual exploitation, blackmail, and pressure to convert religion, and then the accused doctor reportedly went missing as police and the university's Internal Committee attempted to locate him. Reports described multiple steps: an FIR under serious charges, suspension by the institution, restrictions on campus access except for inquiry proceedings, and security measures for the complainant including safe accommodation. Separately, coverage noted a fact-finding committee beginning its probe while police teams conducted raids. This is the nightmare scenario for any HR or compliance function: the moment when process (ICC inquiry) collides with criminal allegations, personal safety risk, and the public's demand for answers.
The emotional damage here is not limited to one survivor. In hospitals and universities, power is structural: senior-junior hierarchies, night shifts, hostel dependence, recommendation culture, and the fear that "everyone knows everyone." When an accused person disappears, the institution loses the single most important thing it can offer the survivor and the workforce - the assurance that the system can hold power accountable. Colleagues then split into factions: some demand immediate justice, some protect reputation, some go silent out of fear. The survivor carries not just trauma, but isolation - because every conversation becomes political. For managers, the shock is realizing that workplace safety is not a slogan; it is logistics: secure housing, controlled access, witness protection, and communication discipline so leaks do not retraumatize the complainant.
From a compliance and leadership lens, this is where POSH maturity is tested. The POSH Act expects timely inquiry, confidentiality, and interim relief. But cases with criminal dimensions demand coordination: evidence preservation, non-interference with police processes, and strict access controls. HR should have a "high-risk allegation protocol" ready before the first complaint arrives: immediate safety assessment, interim measures documented, campus/office access rules, IT log preservation, and a single spokesperson model to prevent rumor-driven harm. Also recognize the legal exposure: retaliation risk, defamation cross-claims, and procedural challenges if the inquiry is seen as biased or delayed. The point is not only compliance - it is trust repair. In 2026, the workforce judges leadership less by "policy existence" and more by crisis handling quality.
When the accused disappears or refuses cooperation, what should an institution prioritize first - survivor safety, speedy inquiry closure, public transparency, or evidence preservation?
What should a "high-risk POSH + criminal allegation" playbook contain so HR is not improvising under pressure - interim relief templates, access controls, comms rules, external counsel triggers, or something else?
Source: @TOI, @HT, @MedicalDialogues
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
7The emotional damage here is not limited to one survivor. In hospitals and universities, power is structural: senior-junior hierarchies, night shifts, hostel dependence, recommendation culture, and the fear that "everyone knows everyone." When an accused person disappears, the institution loses the single most important thing it can offer the survivor and the workforce - the assurance that the system can hold power accountable. Colleagues then split into factions: some demand immediate justice, some protect reputation, some go silent out of fear. The survivor carries not just trauma, but isolation - because every conversation becomes political. For managers, the shock is realizing that workplace safety is not a slogan; it is logistics: secure housing, controlled access, witness protection, and communication discipline so leaks do not retraumatize the complainant.
From a compliance and leadership lens, this is where POSH maturity is tested. The POSH Act expects timely inquiry, confidentiality, and interim relief. But cases with criminal dimensions demand coordination: evidence preservation, non-interference with police processes, and strict access controls. HR should have a "high-risk allegation protocol" ready before the first complaint arrives: immediate safety assessment, interim measures documented, campus/office access rules, IT log preservation, and a single spokesperson model to prevent rumor-driven harm. Also recognize the legal exposure: retaliation risk, defamation cross-claims, and procedural challenges if the inquiry is seen as biased or delayed. The point is not only compliance - it is trust repair. In 2026, the workforce judges leadership less by "policy existence" and more by crisis handling quality.
When the accused disappears or refuses cooperation, what should an institution prioritize first - survivor safety, speedy inquiry closure, public transparency, or evidence preservation?
What should a "high-risk POSH + criminal allegation" playbook contain so HR is not improvising under pressure - interim relief templates, access controls, comms rules, external counsel triggers, or something else?
Source: @TOI, @HT, @MedicalDialogues
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In such a high-stakes crisis, the first priority of an institution should always be the safety of the survivor. This includes providing secure accommodation, ensuring the survivor's well-being, and offering psychological support if needed. The institution must also ensure that the survivor is protected from any form of retaliation or victimization.
The next priority should be evidence preservation. This is crucial as it forms the basis of both the internal inquiry and the police investigation. The HR team should work closely with the legal team and the police to ensure that all potential evidence is preserved. This could include CCTV footage, access logs, emails, and other forms of communication.
Speedy inquiry closure and public transparency are also important, but they should not compromise the quality of the investigation or the rights of the parties involved. The inquiry should be thorough and unbiased, and the findings should be communicated to all relevant parties in a timely manner.
A "high-risk POSH + criminal allegation" playbook should contain the following:
1. Clear guidelines on immediate actions to be taken when a complaint is received, including safety assessment and implementation of interim measures.
2. Detailed procedures for preserving evidence and coordinating with law enforcement agencies.
3. A protocol for managing communications, including appointing a single spokesperson to handle all external communications and prevent the spread of rumors.
4. Guidelines on providing support to the survivor, including counselling services and protection measures.
5. A plan for managing the aftermath of the incident, including steps to rebuild trust within the organization and measures to prevent such incidents in the future.
Remember, the goal is not just to comply with the law, but to ensure the safety and well-being of all employees, and to maintain the trust and reputation of the institution.
From India, Gurugram
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The next priority should be evidence preservation. This is crucial as it forms the basis of both the internal inquiry and the police investigation. The HR team should work closely with the legal team and the police to ensure that all potential evidence is preserved. This could include CCTV footage, access logs, emails, and other forms of communication.
Speedy inquiry closure and public transparency are also important, but they should not compromise the quality of the investigation or the rights of the parties involved. The inquiry should be thorough and unbiased, and the findings should be communicated to all relevant parties in a timely manner.
A "high-risk POSH + criminal allegation" playbook should contain the following:
1. Clear guidelines on immediate actions to be taken when a complaint is received, including safety assessment and implementation of interim measures.
2. Detailed procedures for preserving evidence and coordinating with law enforcement agencies.
3. A protocol for managing communications, including appointing a single spokesperson to handle all external communications and prevent the spread of rumors.
4. Guidelines on providing support to the survivor, including counselling services and protection measures.
5. A plan for managing the aftermath of the incident, including steps to rebuild trust within the organization and measures to prevent such incidents in the future.
Remember, the goal is not just to comply with the law, but to ensure the safety and well-being of all employees, and to maintain the trust and reputation of the institution.
From India, Gurugram
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.