Sahil Wakode Suicide: IIT Bombay Faculty Forum Says Prof Doolla Not Suspended, Only ‘Temporarily Relieved’; Sociology Professor Questions Its Legal Status

Mumbai- A disagreement has emerged within IIT Bombay over the Faculty Forum’s public support for Professor Suryanarayana Doolla, who was named in the police case following the suicidal death of second-year student Sahil Ravindra Wakode. Professor Doolla was suspended on 21 September as the Mumbai crime branch is investigating the case. However, the Faculty Forum issued a statement clarifying that Prof Doolla has not been suspended from his service from IIT Bombay, and continues to be a member of the faculty of the institute in good standing. "He has been temporarily relieved from his duties as Dean (Administrative Affairs) of the institute, to enable independent unbiased investigation of the unfortunate incident on 18th September 2026," the statement read.

Professor Suryakant Waghmore of Sociology Deparment has questioned the legal status and representational authority of the Faculty Forum, saying that not all faculty members identify with or agree with the group’s position.

In an email addressed to Faculty Forum president Professor Rajkumar Pant, Waghmore wrote that, to his understanding, “Faculty Forum is not a legal body” and asked the Forum to clarify its legal status before sending mass emails on the matter.

Waghmore further argued that a faculty member can be suspended while an investigation committee is conducting its inquiry, pointing to what he described as precedents within the institute. He questioned the decision of the Faculty Forum to take a position in support of one side while the investigation is still underway.

The professor also objected to what he described as the lack of sympathy in the Forum’s communication towards the student who died and those grieving his death. He warned that if he received further mass emails from the Faculty Forum in this regard, he would consider pursuing legal action against Pant.

Waghmore later reiterated his position publicly, saying that the Faculty Forum was not a legal body and that its intervention amounted to putting pressure on the investigation committee. “Not all faculty identify with this group,” he said, adding that he was making the statement on record and that any media organisation could quote him.

He also questioned Pant’s status within the Forum, saying that Pant was not an elected member of the body and that elections that were due had not been held. Waghmore said this raised questions about Pant making what he described as “absurd comments” on behalf of the Forum.

What did the Faculty Forum say about Prof Doolla?

Waghmore’s objections came a day after the IIT Bombay Faculty Forum issued a statement expressing solidarity with Professor Suryanarayana Doolla. In its September 20 statement, the Forum said Doolla was invigilating a mid-semester examination between 11 am and 1 pm on September 18 when he noticed a student allegedly using a smartphone without authorisation. The Forum described the incident as academic malpractice and said Doolla reported it to the institute authorities in accordance with Senate-approved academic policies.

The Forum said it was distressed over what it described as attempts to tarnish Doolla’s reputation and maintained that he had been discharging his academic duties and following institute-approved procedures. It also expressed condolences to Sahil’s family while extending solidarity to Doolla.

On September 21, the IIT Bombay Faculty Forum issued a second statement reiterating that it “stands strongly with our colleague” Prof. Suryanarayana Doolla, and clarified that, contrary to several media reports, Doolla had not been suspended from his service at IIT Bombay and continued as a faculty member “in good standing.” The Forum said he had only been temporarily relieved of his duties as Dean (Administrative Affairs) to facilitate an “independent unbiased investigation” into the September 18 incident.

Highlighting Doolla’s “accolades and awards,” including two teaching excellence awards based on student feedback, the Forum also cited his contribution to student-welfare initiatives during his tenure as Dean (Student Affairs). It said it was “distressed” by what it termed the “vilification” of his reputation through “false and misleading reports” in the media, while reiterating that it was “pained by the sad demise” of Sahil Ravindra Wakode following the September 18 incident.

The statement came amid a wider dispute over the circumstances surrounding Sahil’s death. Sahil’s family has alleged caste-based harassment and discrimination, while IIT Bombay has denied the allegations. A police case was registered following the family’s complaint and the investigation has been transferred to the Mumbai Police Crime Branch. The allegations remain subject to investigation.

The exchange between the two professors highlights a divide within IIT Bombay over how the institute should respond while the investigation into Sahil’s death continues. The Faculty Forum has presented Doolla’s actions as the implementation of established examination procedures. Waghmore, meanwhile, has questioned the Forum’s authority to make such a collective intervention and argued that it should not take sides while an investigation is pending.

The dispute comes amid sustained student protests at IIT Bombay. The institute subsequently agreed to an 18-point charter of demands submitted by students. It also suspended Doolla from his administrative role as Dean of Administrative Affairs with immediate effect, while stating that further action would follow the investigation.

The latest exchange has therefore added another dimension to the controversy: not only the allegations surrounding Sahil’s death and the role of Prof. Doolla, but also questions within the faculty over who speaks for IIT Bombay’s faculty community, what authority the Faculty Forum represents, and whether public statements during an ongoing investigation can influence the inquiry.