> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.theglobalvoice.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # Sridhar Vembu Opposes Charges Against IIT Bombay’s Professor Doolla - URL: https://www.theglobalvoice.com/sridhar-vembu-opposes-charges-against-iit-bombays-professor-doolla/ - Published: 2026-09-21T07:43:44.000Z - Updated: 2026-09-21T07:43:44.000Z - Description: Sridhar Vembu has backed IIT Bombay professor Suryanarayana Doolla, who faces an FIR after student Sahil Wakode’s death. The case has divided the campus over caste-discrimination allegations, academic discipline, student welfare and the need to protect due process. - Author: TGV Desk - Tags: India, that is Bharat, conflict, The Day So Far, has-audio Zoho co-founder Sridhar Vembu has publicly supported IIT Bombay professor Suryanarayana Doolla, who has been named in a police case following the death by suicide of second-year BTech student Sahil Wakode. Vembu shared a social-media post calling for the case against Doolla to be withdrawn and wrote: “I deeply respect Ananthan’s principled stand in this matter. Prof Suryanarayana Doolla should not be subject to this.” The post Vembu endorsed argued that the [Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act](https://tribal.nic.in/actRules/preventionofAtricities.pdf?ref=theglobalvoice.com) was being misused against the professor. Vembu’s intervention has brought national attention to a case already dividing IIT Bombay between students demanding accountability and faculty members warning against presuming guilt before the investigation is completed. Wakode, a 20-year-old student in the Department of Energy Science and Engineering, died on September 18, hours after he was allegedly found using a mobile phone during a mid-semester examination. IIT Bombay said the examination paper had been uploaded to ChatGPT to obtain answers. > I deeply respect Ananthan's principled stand in this matter. > > Prof Suryanarayana Doolla should not be subject to this. [https://t.co/tuL0zz2BN4](https://t.co/tuL0zz2BN4?ref=theglobalvoice.com) > > — Sridhar Vembu (@svembu) [September 20, 2026](https://x.com/svembu/status/2101658724796670201?ref%5Fsrc=twsrc%5Etfw&ref=theglobalvoice.com) Professor Doolla, who was invigilating the examination, reported the alleged violation to the institute. IIT Bombay said no disciplinary action had been initiated against Wakode and that he was counselled by Doolla and the head of his department. According to the institute, the student was assured that the episode would not adversely affect his academic career. Wakode’s parents have presented a sharply different account. His father alleged that Doolla had subjected his son to caste-based discrimination and made casteist remarks over the preceding three months. The family also alleged that Wakode was threatened with suspension after the examination incident. Acting on the father’s complaint, Mumbai Police registered an FIR naming Doolla and unidentified others under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, covering abetment of suicide, along with provisions of the SC/ST Act. The investigation has since been transferred to the Mumbai Police Crime Branch. The allegations have not been proven, and no court has reached any finding against the professor. --- IIT Bombay has denied that caste discrimination occurred in the case. Its SC/ST Students and Staff Cell said Wakode had not filed a complaint about caste-based mistreatment with either the cell or the administration. That absence, however, does not by itself settle whether discrimination occurred, which remains a matter for investigation. The institute’s Faculty Forum has also backed Doolla, saying he was performing his duties under Senate-approved academic rules. It said the professor observed unauthorised smartphone use, reported it through the prescribed procedure and was now having his reputation tarnished before the facts had been established. Students have continued to press for a broader inquiry into Wakode’s death and IIT Bombay’s institutional culture. After three days of protests, the institute’s director signed an 18-point charter that includes demands for an independent investigation, improved mental-health support, greater student representation and a code of conduct for professors. Students have also sought Doolla’s suspension while the inquiry proceeds; the director said the institute would follow due process. Vembu’s remarks have now widened the argument beyond IIT Bombay. One side sees the case as another warning about caste discrimination, student distress and unequal power inside elite institutions. The other sees an academic being publicly condemned for reporting examination malpractice before the evidence has been tested. Both questions require scrutiny. A grieving family’s allegations cannot be dismissed merely because no earlier complaint was recorded. Nor can an FIR be treated as proof of guilt. The Crime Branch investigation will have to establish what occurred before the examination, what was said afterward and whether there is evidence connecting any alleged conduct to Wakode’s death.