IIT-B students clarify protest amid student suicide: We don't condone cheating

In a statement, IIT Bombay students said their protest was never about defending cheating, but about Sahil's death, institutional accountability and the need for reform. They also called for the concerns raised by students to remain student-led and rooted within the institute.

In Short

• IIT Bombay students clarify protest not for academic misconduct but systemic reforms
• Professor Doolla removed as Dean but remains professor during investigation
• Students demand reforms remain student-led, rejecting external political influence

IIT Bombay student representatives have clarified that their protest following the death by suicide of second-year student Sahil Wakode was not intended to justify academic misconduct, while reiterating their demand for institutional reforms and an impartial investigation into the circumstances surrounding his death.

In an official statement issued on September 21, the student representatives said they did not condone cheating or any form of academic misconduct. At the same time, they said Sahil’s death had forced students to examine the systems and processes within the institute.

The statement comes after three days of protests on the IIT Bombay campus and hours after the institute removed Professor Suryanarayana Doolla from his position as Dean of Administrative Affairs. IIT Bombay has said Doolla will continue as a professor while the investigation into the circumstances surrounding Sahil’s death proceeds.

PROTEST ABOUT SYSTEMIC CONCERNS, NOT CHEATING

Sahil died by suicide on September 18, after an incident during an examination earlier that day. IIT Bombay had initially said he was found using a mobile phone during the exam and had uploaded the question paper to ChatGPT to seek answers. The institute said he was counselled after the incident and that no disciplinary action had been initiated against him.

The circumstances surrounding his death subsequently triggered protests by students, who questioned the institute’s handling of the episode and raised broader concerns about student welfare, mental-health support, representation and institutional accountability.

In their latest statement, the student representatives sought to draw a distinction between academic misconduct and the issues raised by the protest.

“We do not stand for or condone cheating or any form of academic misconduct,” they said, adding that the protest was a collective effort to raise concerns over “systemic issues” that had existed for some time.

The representatives said students had formulated a set of demands over the past few days and formally placed them before IIT Bombay Director Shireesh Kedare. According to the statement, the Director acknowledged and signed the demands and agreed to work towards their implementation within specified timelines.

Earlier reports said the students had submitted an 18-point charter that included demands relating to institutional accountability, student representation, mental-health and medical support and an independent mechanism to examine student distress.

STUDENTS CLARIFY POSITION ON PROFESSOR DOOLLA

The student representatives also addressed the controversy surrounding Professor Suryanarayana Doolla, who was the invigilator during the examination in which Sahil was allegedly found with a phone.

The students said their position had never been based on an assumption of Doolla’s guilt.

“With respect to Professor Suryanarayana Doolla, we would like to clarify that our position has never been one of presuming guilt or prejudging the ongoing investigation,” they said.

They added that they stood with Doolla “as a member of our faculty community” and believed the investigation should proceed fairly and impartially.

The students said their demand had been for Doolla to be relieved of his administrative responsibilities as Dean of Administrative Affairs during the investigation. They described this as a precautionary measure to ensure that the investigation remained independent.

IIT Bombay on Monday removed Doolla from the deanship with immediate effect. The institute also apologised for aspects of its earlier communication about Sahil’s death, saying details surrounding the incident remained under investigation.

SAHIL'S FAMILY HAD ALLEGED CASTE DISCRIMINATION

The case has also taken a caste-discrimination angle. Sahil’s parents have alleged that he faced caste-based discrimination and harassment on campus. IIT Bombay had said that no complaint regarding caste discrimination had been submitted by Sahil to its SC-ST cell or the administration.

Based on a complaint by Sahil’s father, Mumbai Police registered an FIR naming Doolla, invoking Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, relating to abetment of suicide, along with provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The matter has been transferred for investigation by the Crime Branch, according to reports.

These allegations remain subject to investigation.

CONCERNS MUST REMAIN STUDENT LED

The student representatives also pushed back against attempts to frame the campus agitation through external political or organisational narratives. They said concerns arising from Sahil’s death should remain “student-led” and be addressed within IIT Bombay.

“The loss of Sahil should not become a platform for external political interests, organisations, or narratives to shape the concerns of the IIT Bombay student community,” they said.

The representatives said the demands had emerged from students’ experiences on campus and that the reform process should remain rooted in the student community and the institute.

They concluded by saying students remained united in seeking accountability, transparency and institutional reform and would work with IIT Bombay towards building what they described as a safer, more accountable and supportive campus.

“IIT Bombay students are strong. IIT Bombay students are united. Student concerns must remain with the students,” the statement said.

- Ends