Sahil Wakode Death: AIISCA Accuses Athawale of Shielding IIT Bombay Director, Asks “Whose Side Are You On?”

Mumbai- The All India Independent Scheduled Castes Association (AIISCA) has strongly condemned Union Minister Ramdas Athawale, accusing him of shielding IIT Bombay director Kedare in the Sahil Wakode suicide case.

According to the statement, Athawale met the IIT Bombay director on 20 September, more than a month ago. AIISCA says that after the meeting he posed for a smiling photograph with Shireesh B Kedare, who is named in the allegations over Sahil’s death. The organisation asked whether Athawale, who calls himself a “Panther” and holds a Union ministerial post, showed the courage to question the director directly, and what he asked about the institutional failures behind Sahil’s death.

AIISCA says that, within due legal process, Athawale could have asked the Education Ministry and the competent authorities for:

1. Temporary suspension of Kedare and Dulla until an impartial inquiry is complete

2. Public release of the institute’s internal committee report

3. Fixing of institutional accountability

4. A time-bound, impartial investigation

Instead, the statement says, what has been seen is only assurances of holding meetings, talk of follow-up, and appeals to trust the judicial process.

The most serious charge is that, after visiting IIT Bombay, Athawale repeated in an interview the version put forward by Kedare and Dulla. That version holds that Sahil had copied, was gently told not to repeat the mistake, and yet died by suicide. AIISCA asked what kind of approach this is for a Union Minister to take toward a student suicide against a backdrop of caste discrimination and institutional harassment. It argued that, instead of echoing the account of those the bereaved family has accused, he should have questioned the caste climate and institutional failures at the institute. It also asked whether Athawale is unaware of the extensive research on caste discrimination, exclusion and humiliation faced by Dalit students in India’s premier higher-education institutions, and why a grave institutional problem is being wrapped in politically convenient language such as “there may have been caste discrimination.”

The organisation asked why, even after Athawale’s visit, IIT Bombay students and AIISCA activists protesting for Sahil faced harsh police action and detention. It also asked:

• What was the actual outcome of these meetings?

• What concrete action has been taken on institutional accountability?

• Why, more than a month on, has there been no clear public decision on the demand for a CID probe?

• Why has the internal committee report still not been made public?

AIISCA acknowledged that, as a Union Minister, Athawale may not personally have the authority to suspend staff. But it said he certainly has the political and administrative weight to demand action from the Education Ministry and competent authorities, pressure them, and get institutional accountability fixed.

The statement says a ministerial post cannot be limited to visiting institutions, taking photographs, issuing statements and returning without concrete action. AIISCA said it does not want another assurance of standing with Sahil’s parents and wants to see what Athawale will actually do with the powers of his office. In its view, Ambedkarite politics is about holding institutional casteism to account, not compromising with it. The statement ends by asking: if a Union Minister cannot use his position to fix institutional accountability, what is the use of holding that post in the name of Ambedkarite politics?