The controversy surrounding the death of IIT Bombay student Sahil Wakode has taken a political turn, with Advocate Nikhil Kamble, who is representing Wakode’s parents, identified as a functionary of the Maharashtra Pradesh Youth Congress.
Kamble has emerged as one of the principal public voices speaking on behalf of Wakode’s family. He has demanded the arrest of those named in the FIR and has called for a fair investigation by the Mumbai Crime Branch. On Wednesday, he also alleged that Mumbai Police had attempted to take Wakode’s parents out of Mumbai against their wishes, a claim denied by the police, who said the couple had themselves asked to be taken to Yavatmal.
Kamble’s political affiliation is not incidental to the broader developments surrounding the case. He has previously held organisational positions in the Maharashtra Pradesh Youth Congress and has been associated with its legal/RTI-related activities. Kamble’s LinkedIn profile describes him as a Maharashtra Youth Congress functionary.
The Youth Congress has also independently entered the controversy, with its members staging a protest outside IIT Bombay on Wednesday demanding justice for Wakode.
His Facebook profile also describes him as an “Ambedkarite”, “Advocate” and “Criminal lawyer”. The profile and post therefore establish Kamble’s own public identification with both the Congress organisation and Ambedkarite politics.
In a Facebook post dated July 13, 2024, seen by OpIndia, Kamble wrote that he had been appreciated for his “legal work and services” by Indian Youth Congress National Incharge Krishna Allavaru and then National President Srinivas V
The senior Youth Congress functionary is representing the family, while the Youth Congress itself has mobilised around the case, is a relevant detail in understanding the wider political context in which the allegations are now being debated.
Wakode, a 20-year-old second-year BTech student, died by suicide on September 18, hours after an examination incident in which he was allegedly caught using a mobile phone and ChatGPT. His parents subsequently alleged that their son had been subjected to caste-based harassment and accused Professor Suryanarayana Doolla of making casteist remarks. An FIR was registered invoking provisions relating to abetment of suicide and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
IIT Bombay has disputed the caste-harassment narrative, stating that Wakode had not lodged a complaint with either the institute administration or its SC/ST cell. His parents maintain that their son had told them about caste-based harassment. The two versions are now part of the investigation.
Significantly, the evidence surrounding the examination incident has also evolved. CCTV footage that emerged this week reportedly shows Doolla approaching Wakode after apparently noticing him looking at something in his pocket and subsequently taking him aside from other students. The footage is being examined by investigators as part of the reconstruction of events before Wakode returned to his hostel.
A friend of Wakode has also provided an account that differs from the family’s allegations. The friend reportedly said that casteism was not something he associated with Wakode’s experience and confirmed that Wakode had been caught during the examination. Such accounts do not conclusively disprove the family’s allegations, but they underline why the competing claims require independent verification rather than being treated as facts.
Meanwhile, IIT Bombay has constituted a ten-member panel to examine the circumstances surrounding Wakode’s death and the concerns raised by his family. Professor Doolla has been relieved of his administrative duties and placed on leave pending the inquiry, while the Mumbai Crime Branch continues its investigation.
