IIT Bombay Student Death: SC/ST Act, Suicide Abetment Filed
By Squirrels·
Advertisement
A faculty member at IIT Bombay has been booked under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and for abetment of suicide after a 22-year-old Dalit student died in his hostel room on September 19, 2026. The case marks a rare instance of criminal charges being filed against a sitting IIT faculty member over alleged caste-based harassment.
What Happened at IIT Bombay on September 19, 2026?
Sahil Wakode, a second-year BTech student in the Department of Energy Science and Engineering at IIT Bombay, was found dead in his hostel room on the evening of Friday, September 19, 2026. He was 22 years old.
The sequence of events leading to his death has become the subject of a criminal investigation. According to his family and media reports, Wakode had earlier that day been caught using ChatGPT during an examination — an academic integrity violation under the institute's rules. What followed, his father alleges, was not a standard disciplinary process.
Wakode's father has stated that a faculty member, identified in police records as Suryanarayan Dulla, subjected his son to caste-based verbal abuse and threatened to implicate him in a false case. Hours after this alleged encounter, Wakode was found dead.
The Mumbai Police filed an FIR on Saturday, September 20, 2026, booking the faculty member under:
Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — which covers intentional insult and intimidation of SC/ST persons
Relevant sections pertaining to abetment of suicide under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)
The Mumbai Crime Branch has taken over the investigation from the local police.
What Are the Allegations Against the Faculty Member?
The family's allegations, as reported across multiple news outlets, centre on three specific claims:
First, that the faculty member made caste-based slurs directed at Wakode following the examination incident. Under the SC/ST Atrocities Act, deliberate use of caste-based insults against a person from a Scheduled Caste community in a public place is a cognisable, non-bailable offence.
Second, that the faculty member threatened to implicate Wakode in a false case — an allegation that, if substantiated, would speak to a pattern of intimidation rather than standard academic misconduct proceedings.
Third, Wakode's mother, speaking to the media, alleged that her son had been subjected to torture [UNVERIFIED — the precise nature of this allegation is under police investigation and has not been independently corroborated at the time of publication].
Protesting students have raised 11 demands, including the resignation of the Dean, according to Hindi-language coverage of the case. The protests continued on the IIT Bombay campus into Saturday, September 20.
The faculty member named in the FIR has not, as of the time of writing, issued a public statement through official channels. IIT Bombay's administration has also not released a detailed public response to the criminal charges.
What Legal Framework Applies Here?
The invocation of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is legally significant and shapes how this case will proceed.
What Is the SC/ST Atrocities Act?
The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, amended significantly in 2015 and 2018, was enacted to address the persistent gap between the legal equality guaranteed by the Constitution and the lived reality of caste discrimination in India. The Act creates a special category of offences — atrocities — that attract stricter punishment and special procedural provisions.
Key features relevant to this case:
Non-bailable offences: Most atrocity offences under the Act are non-bailable, meaning bail requires a court hearing rather than being granted at the police station level.
Special courts: Cases are meant to be tried in designated Special Courts to ensure faster disposal.
Burden of proof considerations: The 2018 amendment (following the Supreme Court's Subhash Kashinath Mahajan judgment, which had introduced preliminary inquiry requirements) restored the original provision allowing immediate arrest without prior approval.
Abetment of suicide provisions: The BNS provisions on abetment of suicide, when combined with the Atrocities Act charges, create a compound criminal exposure for the accused.
What Does "Abetment of Suicide" Require to Prove?
Abetment of suicide under Indian law requires establishing that the accused:
Instigated the deceased to commit suicide, or
Engaged in conspiracy that led to the suicide, or
Aided the act through any act or omission
Courts have held that there must be a proximate and direct link between the accused's conduct and the deceased's decision to end their life. The Supreme Court in Amalendu Pal v. State of West Bengal (2010) held that for abetment of suicide, the accused must have played an active role in the instigation. Circumstantial evidence, including the timing of events, verbal threats, and the mental state of the deceased, becomes central to such cases.
The fact that Wakode died within hours of the alleged interaction with the faculty member will be a critical temporal factor in the investigation.
Is This Pattern Unique to IIT Bombay?
The data suggests it is not. The death of Sahil Wakode fits within a documented pattern of Dalit student deaths at India's premier educational institutions.
The most widely cited precedent is the death of Rohith Vemula, a PhD scholar at the University of Hyderabad, in January 2016. Vemula's death triggered a national debate on institutional caste discrimination and led to demands for the implementation of the Rohith Vemula Act — a proposed legislation that has not been enacted as of 2026 [UNVERIFIED — legislative status requires confirmation against current Parliamentary records].
Between 2014 and 2024, the Ministry of Education's data tabled in Parliament showed that IITs reported a disproportionate number of student suicides among SC/ST students compared to their share of enrolment [UNVERIFIED — precise figures require verification against Ministry of Education RTI data and Parliamentary question responses; The Squirrels will publish a dedicated data analysis when verified figures are obtained].
The National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) has previously taken suo motu cognisance of student deaths at central universities and IITs where caste discrimination was alleged. Whether the NCSC intervenes in the Wakode case remains to be seen.
What Institutional Mechanisms Exist — and Have They Worked?
Every IIT is mandated under UGC guidelines to have:
An Equal Opportunity Cell to address discrimination complaints
A SC/ST Liaison Officer for grievance redressal
An Anti-Discrimination Officer (ADO), as recommended by the Thorat Committee report (2007)
The Thorat Committee — formally titled the Report of the Committee to Enquire into the Allegation of Differential Treatment of SC/ST Students in AIIMS, New Delhi — found systemic evidence of discriminatory treatment in elite institutions and made recommendations that remain only partially implemented across IITs and central universities.
The fundamental question that the Wakode case raises is not whether policies exist on paper, but whether institutional mechanisms function in practice when the alleged perpetrator is a faculty member with seniority and institutional standing.
What Happens Next? The Investigation and Its Implications
The Mumbai Crime Branch now holds the investigation. Key steps that will determine how this case proceeds include:
Recording the faculty member's statement — The accused has been booked but the investigative process will include a formal statement, after which the Crime Branch will determine whether arrest is warranted.
Forensic and digital evidence — Any communications between Wakode and the faculty member, CCTV footage from the examination hall and hostel, and Wakode's personal devices will be examined.
Witness statements — Students who witnessed the examination incident or the subsequent interaction will be critical witnesses.
IIT Bombay's internal inquiry — The institute is legally required to conduct its own inquiry under the SC/ST Act's provisions requiring institutional response to complaints.
NCSC and Ministry of Education oversight — Given the national attention the case has received, central oversight is likely.
The 11 demands raised by protesting students — including the Dean's resignation — signal that institutional accountability is also being demanded in parallel to the criminal process. These are separate tracks: the criminal FIR addresses the specific conduct of the named faculty member; the institutional demands address systemic accountability.
What Does the Law Say About Academic Institutions and Caste Discrimination?
The legal architecture governing caste discrimination in educational institutions is layered:
Constitutional level: Article 15(4) permits special provisions for advancement of SC/ST communities; Article 17 abolishes untouchability in all forms.
Legislative level: The SC/ST Atrocities Act, the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act (for intersection cases), and institutional statutes.
Regulatory level: UGC anti-discrimination guidelines (2012, revised 2023), which require institutions to create grievance mechanisms and designate anti-discrimination officers.
Judicial precedents: The Supreme Court in Nandini Sundar v. State of Chhattisgarh and subsequent cases has repeatedly held that constitutional protections for marginalised communities impose positive obligations on the state and state institutions — not merely the negative obligation to refrain from discrimination.
The question of whether an IIT — a centrally funded institution — can be held to a higher standard of institutional liability when a faculty member commits an atrocity on its premises is one that courts may be called upon to address as this case develops.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who is Sahil Wakode?
Sahil Wakode was a 22-year-old second-year BTech student in the Department of Energy Science and Engineering at IIT Bombay. He was found dead in his hostel room on September 19, 2026, after allegedly being subjected to caste-based abuse and threats by a faculty member earlier that day.
What charges have been filed in the IIT Bombay case?
Mumbai Police have filed an FIR against faculty member Suryanarayan Dulla under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and for abetment of suicide under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The case has been transferred to the Mumbai Crime Branch.
What is the SC/ST Atrocities Act and how does it apply here?
The SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, criminalises intentional insult, intimidation, and physical harm directed at persons from Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe communities. It is invoked here because the deceased student belonged to an SC community, and the alleged abuse is claimed to have been specifically caste-based. Offences under this Act are non-bailable.
What was the role of the ChatGPT incident?
Wakode was caught using ChatGPT during an examination — an academic integrity violation. His family alleges that the subsequent interaction with the faculty member over this incident was the occasion for the alleged caste-based abuse and threats. The examination incident itself is a separate matter from the criminal charges, which pertain exclusively to the alleged conduct of the faculty member.
Have similar cases occurred at IITs before?
Yes. The death of Rohith Vemula at the University of Hyderabad in 2016 is the most prominent precedent. Parliament has received data indicating student suicides at central institutions, with documented concerns about their intersection with caste identity. The Thorat Committee (2007) and subsequent inquiries have documented discriminatory treatment of SC/ST students at elite institutions.
What is the IIT Bombay administration's response?
As of September 20, 2026, IIT Bombay had not released a detailed public statement addressing the criminal charges. Protesting students have raised 11 demands, including the resignation of the Dean. The institute is legally required to conduct an internal inquiry.
Conclusion
The death of Sahil Wakode and the subsequent filing of criminal charges under the SC/ST Atrocities Act against a sitting IIT faculty member represent a significant moment in the ongoing reckoning with caste discrimination in India's elite educational institutions. The criminal process will determine individual culpability; the institutional response will determine whether IIT Bombay — and by extension India's IIT system — takes the structural changes that advocates and inquiry committees have recommended for nearly two decades seriously.
Three questions will define this case's lasting significance: whether the criminal charges result in conviction and institutional accountability, whether IIT Bombay implements enforceable anti-discrimination mechanisms beyond paper policies, and whether the Centre responds with legislative or regulatory action that closes the gap between the Thorat Committee's recommendations and institutional reality.
The data, when it is fully assembled and verified, will tell this story with precision. The Squirrels will publish a dedicated data analysis of SC/ST student deaths and discrimination complaints at IITs when verified figures are obtained through RTI and official sources.