Yet again, an IIT campus is in turmoil over a student’s death by suicide, the tenth this calendar year. The latest case, at IIT-Bombay, is of a reserved-category student who took his own life after an interaction with a member of the faculty.
Given the tenuous nature of social relations on Indian campuses, especially of premier educational institutions, and also the current context of youth unrest in the country, the case needs to be dealt with as both a systemic as well as individual issue.
The controversy centres around Sahil Wakode, a second-year B Tech student in the Energy Science and Engineering Department of IIT-Bombay, who was allegedly found using ChatGPT to write his answers in an exam.
A professor who detected this asked him to leave the hall. Wakode was seen going back to his hostel room and was later found dead in it. IIT-Bombay says no disciplinary proceedings had been initiated against the student, and that he was counselled and assured that the incident would not damage his academic career.
The case became a caste-discrimination controversy when Wakode's parents alleged that their son had previously been subjected to harassment by the professor and other members of faculty. An SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act case filed by the father was taken up for investigation by the police, directly naming the faculty member. The investigation was subsequently transferred to the Crime Branch of the Mumbai Police.
The director of IIT-Bombay Shireesh Kedare denies that caste was a factor in the case. Wakode apparently had never made a complaint either to the institute's SC/ST cell or to the administration. Also, the professor could not have known the caste status of Wakode because such information is not revealed to faculty. This is a typically simplistic view, which is often taken by campus managements in India.
It shows an ignorance of how caste discrimination plays out when young men and women from diverse backgrounds are thrown together in an atmosphere of high performance, the parameters for which are set by the social elite.
Moreover, IIT-Bombay made the error of disclosing the ChatGPT cheating episode even before an internal inquiry had been conducted into the case. This looked like a ploy to individuate the motive for suicide and deflect attention from the systemic disadvantages students from underprivileged backgrounds encounter in IITs.
Clarity on motive and guilt rarely emerges from a suicide case, and it is pointless to debate speculations while an investigation is under way. Instead, it is more useful to look at the systemic factors that make campus life hell for students from disadvantaged sections. IITs may have introduced counselling and mentorship services in recent years, but work remains to be done on faculty diversity and peer sensitivity.
Dalit students at IITs face taunts regarding their JEE ranks and feel forced to prove their right to be there. Because IIT faculties skew heavily towards privileged classes (80–85%), they struggle to find mentors and peers who share or understand their background. Latent segregation in hostels and labs is a reality.
There is a distinct lack of empathy in the way administrations handle their academic shortcomings or disciplinary issues. The persistence of such issues must count as a failure of the IIT system and demands a nationwide response.