On Friday morning, an IIT Bombay invigilator spotted a phone in an exam hall. By evening, a second-year student was dead. By Sunday night, a director had signed an 18-point charter, and a professor with teaching awards was an accused in an atrocity case. Three days. Somewhere in there, the country skipped the boring part where facts get established.
What is actually known
Sahil Wakode, a second-year BTech student from Yavatmal, was found dead in his Hostel 4 room on 18 September, hours after allegedly being caught with a phone during a mid-semester exam. His parents allege harassment and caste discrimination. Powai police registered a case under Section 108 of the BNS and the SC/ST Act naming Prof. Suryanarayana Doolla, and the Crime Branch now holds the investigation, with no arrests so far. IIT Bombay says the student was counselled by the instructor and the department head, was told the episode would not hurt his career, and faced no disciplinary action. The institute has since suspended Doolla from his dean’s post and apologised for an earlier statement that described the events before investigators had established them.
Note that last part. The institute rushed to tell its story, then rushed to apologise for it. Neither is how you treat a dead 20-year-old.
Two lazy sentences
Everyone is repeating one of these:
“IITs have no caste problem.” Or: “Caste killed him.”
Both are convenient, and neither is evidence. Campuses have a documented history here. In 2023, the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes recommended an FIR under the Atrocities Act against an IIT Bombay counsellor over viral casteist remarks, in a hearing about mental-health support for SC/ST students. At IIT Kanpur, an inquiry found four senior professors guilty of harassing a junior colleague under the same Act, while part of the campus called it misuse.
So the law has been both a shield and, in some people’s eyes, a sword, on the same kind of campus. The honest question is not “does caste exist in IITs?” It is: what was said, by whom, when, and who saw it?
Testing a three-month claim
One report says the parents allege three months of harassment and casteist slurs. Three months leaves a trail: roommates, classmates, hostel records, messages, department interactions, and the phone police have already seized. The same report says no complaint was ever filed with the administration or the campus SC/ST cell. That absence is a clue either way. It may mean nothing happened, or it may mean students don’t trust the cell enough to use it. The Crime Branch should find out which.
There is one more record worth examining. Doolla is a former hostel warden and Dean with a decade at IIT Bombay and several teaching awards. That doesn’t clear him. But a decade of interactions with hundreds of students, including SC/ST students, is exactly the kind of pattern evidence a serious investigation should weigh.
Why the SC-ST Act is atrocious
The SC/ST Act is atrocious on purpose. It was built to protect the SC/ST community for the crime against them. Everyone supported. With act, anticipatory bail is restricted in the ordinary course, and no preliminary inquiry is needed before an FIR. Under the SC/ST Act and Rules, the State provides relief/financial assistance to victims of atrocities. The rules provide for immediate relief and other assistance, with the amount depending on the offense and circumstances.
For context, the latest government/NCRB figures available through 2024 show conviction rates of
| Year | SC cases | ST cases |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 34.1% | 28.1% |
| 2023 | 32.4% | 24.6% |
| 2024 | 33.9% | 33.2% |
These are conviction rates among cases disposed of/decided in the relevant manner. The data shows “66% of cases are fake because only 34% resulted in conviction.”
Hence, the law is getting misused over the time, and even a small disagreement results in filing the SC/ST Act on.
Abetment of suicide under Section 108 is a separate hurdle. The Supreme Court has held repeatedly that a rebuke or reprimand, without intent to push someone toward suicide, is not abetment. Both charges need proof, not just a complaint. I’m not a lawyer, so treat this information as background, not legal advice.
The 3-day protest and the 50-day protest
The Cockroach Janta Party-led protests at Jantar Mantar ran from 6 June to 25 July over the NEET paper leak and exam irregularities. About 2.28 million candidates had sat that exam, and the CBI arrested a Latur coaching-institute owner over it. That was industrial-scale cheating, backed by money, and it took seven weeks of protest. On this campus, an 18-point charter was signed within about two days.
The demands differ, and the students’ grief is genuine. But institutions bend fastest to grief that has a face, and slowest to wrongs that have a system.
There is also a contradiction we should say out loud. In July, this country demanded the harshest action against people who compromise exams. In September, we argue whether an invigilator should have reported a phone. Exam integrity either matters or it doesn’t. What matters is how you enforce it: report, and care for the person in the same breath.
Both sides need a correction
The most visible defence came from Tensemi founder Ananthan Ayyasamy, who belongs to the SC-classified DKV community and is also a BJP district president. He says the case must be withdrawn. A Dalit entrepreneur breaking ranks is notable, and his political office will be used to dismiss him. Either way, “withdraw the case” today is as premature as “punish the professor” was on Saturday. The fair demand is a fast, transparent, time-bound investigation.
Five fixes campuses can make by next semester
- Report and reach out together. Every misconduct report should trigger a same-day counsellor call and a warden or friend check that night. If the institute says counselling happened, publish the protocol so it can be tested.
- Write AI rules in plain words. “Phone means phone.” State the penalty scale in advance, so a first offence never feels like the end of a career.
- Give faculty a paper trail. Every interaction in a misconduct case should be in writing. Nobody should be left to argue from memory.
- Fix the caste-grievance channel. Make it independent of departments, with a deadline for responses. Where students distrust the internal cell, families go FIR-first, and faculty fear FIR-first.
- Keep press releases quiet until police finish. The institute’s own apology shows why.
The only position worth holding
“Justice for Sahil” and “justice for the professor” are not opposites. If the allegations are true, the punishment must be swift and exemplary. If they aren’t, the next invigilator will think twice before reporting anything, and the next student in trouble will face a colder system. What we owe him is boring, slow, evidence-based truth.
Wait for the investigation to reveal the truth; until then, stop the unnecessary activism.