Bengaluru: The Bangalore City Civil Court heard anticipatory bail applications on Thursday, from IIM Bangalore officials and faculty members accused of caste-based discrimination.
The case, filed under FIR No. 0467/2024 at Mico Layout Police Station, involves serious charges under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Ordinance, 2014, and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
The accused, including high-ranking officials and professors of one of India's premier educational institutions, face allegations under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC-ST Act and Sections 351(2) and 351(3) of the BNS for caste-based atrocities and systemic discrimination against a Dalit Professor Dr Gopal Das. The accused had moved their anticipatory bail applications at the district court on December 23 which was heard today.
According to sources, without any interim protection, the court adjourned the hearing till 31 December.
During the proceedings, the counsel representing the IIM officials reportedly urged the court to consider the impact on students' well-being and the ongoing semester, emphasizing that any adverse action could disrupt academic activities.
The eight accused include IIM Bangalore Director Dr. Rishikesh T. Krishnan and 7 Professors Dr. Dinesh Kumar, Dr. Sainesh G, Dr. Srinivas Prakhya, Dr. Chetan Subramanian, Dr. Ashish Mishra, Dr. Srilatha Jonnalagedda and Dr. Rahul De.
This marks a historic case, as it is reportedly the first instance since the establishment of IIMs that a sitting director has been named in an FIR for caste-based discrimination.
It is worth mentioning that the FIR was registered after mounting pressure from activists, civil rights organizations, and the public after The Mooknayak first published a detailed report on December 19, on the Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement (DCRE) investigation findings. The report revealed the DCRE report that conformed systemic caste-based harassment faced by Associate Professor Gopal Das, a globally acclaimed Dalit scholar at IIM Bangalore.
Since the registration of the FIR, Bahujan activists have been voicing strongly for the Director's immediate removal, citing a pattern of his discriminatory behavior that spans years and institutions.
On December 22, When The Mooknayak reached out for a response, IIM Bangalore stated that the Karnataka High Court had granted a stay, preventing further coercive action against the the accused officials, citing doubts about the DCRE's jurisdiction in the matter.
In a second statement on December 25, the IIMB stated, "The Hon’ble High Court is on vacation. Once the High Court registry uploads a copy of the order on the website, it can be accessed. "
However The Mooknayak found out that none of the police or administrative authorities- neither the DCRE, the complainant's lawyer, nor the Bengaluru Police has received any stay order from the Karnataka High Court.
When The Mooknayak reached out to DCP Sarah Fathima for further clarification on the issue and the status of the proceedings, she stated, “We are waiting for the Karnataka High Court order to be uploaded.” On being specifically asked about the anticipatory bail hearing held on Thursday, DCP Fathima said, “I will find out the details.”
The Mooknayak also sent an email to the Director of IIM Bangalore seeking details on the anticipatory bail proceedings. However, a response is yet to be received.
This development has added a layer of anticipation surrounding the legal proceedings, with stakeholders awaiting clarity on the next steps.
Meanwhile, Bahujan activists accuse Krishnan of continuing his discriminatory practices. They highlight his recent move to shortlist/nominate Professors Chetan Subramanian and Sreelata Jonnalagedda—both accused of caste discrimination and facing an FIR (no. 0467 of 2024)—to the IIMB Board.
In a conversation with The Mooknayak, anti caste activist Anil H Wagde detailed how IIM Bangalore's Director, allegedly influenced proceedings to secure the inclusion of his close aides on the Board of Governors (BoG). This comes as the term of Prof. Rejie George, a BoG member, ended on December 23rd, leaving a vacancy to be filled.
The selection process, as per IIMB guidelines, involves two stages.
Faculty members nominate up to three eligible candidates from a list provided by the Director. This time the list included around 40 names, including all the accused professors currently under investigation for caste-based discrimination.
It is worth mentioning that the IIM (Amendment) Act explicitly requires board members to have clean records. As per the Act, two faculty representatives can be board members with clean record and are not accused/guilty of any criminal case.
The final list (top 3 nominees) featured three Professors including two accused - Chetan Subramanian and Sreelata Jonnalagedda and third one being Dr Venkatesh. The Faculty members voted for the candidates of their choice to select the BoG representatives.
As of now, the final stage of the process has concluded, with the Director expected to forward the recommendation of the candidate who secured the highest votes to the Chairman for inclusion among the faculty representatives of the Board of Governors (BoG). Despite multiple appeals for transparency, the voting process reportedly remains known only to the Director, according to IIMB sources.
It is ultimately up to the Chairman to either accept or reject the Director's recommendation. However, acceptance has historically been the norm.
The inclusion of all accused professors in the eligibility list as well as in the final nominees list has raised questions about the fairness of the process, especially in light of the ongoing legal and social scrutiny surrounding caste discrimination allegations at the institution.
When the Mooknayak sought the Director's stand on the issue, IIM Bangalore did not respond to questions regarding the nomination of faculty members to the IIM Board.
You can also join our WhatsApp group to get premium and selected news of The Mooknayak on WhatsApp. Click here to join the WhatsApp group.