The Events of 20-21 September

Disclaimer: The following is not a transcript or minutes of the discussion but a chronological account of events that took place on 20-21 September 2026, based on accounts from Insight members present at the site, other students present at the site, and video footage. 

Note: The following piece is a continuation of the previous report, titled ‘The Events of 18-19 September’. Readers are advised to refer to the previous report to gain context on the developments covered here.

20 September 2026

On 20 September 2026, the peaceful demonstrations at IIT Bombay continued into their third day. After opening around 7 AM, the Main Gate was closed again at 10 AM. Students continued their sit-in at the site throughout the day.

The students had organised a peaceful protest at 5 PM and began gathering at Hostel 4 for the same. At around 5:30 PM, the gathering began moving towards the Main Gate via Hostels 3, 2 and 1, with more students joining at the NCC T-point. Upon reaching the Main Gate, those already there also joined the gathering.

Meanwhile, a press release by the IIT Bombay Faculty Forum was made. The Forum expressed solidarity with Prof. Suryanarayana Doolla. The Faculty Forum of IIT Bombay is a formal body of the institute, through which faculty members at IIT Bombay can voice opinions to the institute and other bodies. 

At the Main Gate, candles were lit in memory of Sahil, and arrangements were made for students to sit peacefully. Microphones and speakers were also arranged to address the gathering. As the crowd continued to swell, student representatives began coordinating the proceedings.

A minute of silence was observed in Sahil’s memory, following which some of his close ones came forward and expressed their grief and shared their experiences with him. The scene was marked by visible emotion as those close to him talked about their loss and memories of him.

At around 7 PM, the Director and Deputy Director (FIA) also arrived at the site and listened as Sahil’s close ones spoke about him. The Director subsequently addressed the gathering, noting that while IIT’s systemic practices have remained the same, the situation has changed. He further elaborated by committing to developing a system involving student participation, while acknowledging that institutional changes could not be made overnight and that establishing a channel of communication with all students remained a challenge.

The gathering then assumed a Q&A format with students coming forward to express their views and raise questions. However, different sections of students had different demands, which led to disagreements and skirmishes between the groups. Concerns were also expressed regarding the opportunity to speak, further leading to disagreements and making the discussion increasingly difficult to manage. As a result, the first hour saw limited scope for sustained dialogue with the administration.

Following this, the discussion moved to a set of 18 demands compiled by student representatives after multiple iterations and discussions with students present at the protest site. The 18-point demand document had also been circulating across WhatsApp groups and social media since the afternoon. A Google Form was also floated alongside it as a petition allowing students to register their support for the demands. Official institute bodies, including the Academic Council, ISC, ITC, ICC, and Hostel Affairs, also expressed their support for the set of demands on social media. 

It was stated that the form floated alongside it had received 700 responses, out of which 92% were in its support. The Director was taken through each demand individually, and his response was sought and recorded. 

The following is the list of demands put forward and the Director’s response to them:

Demand 1:
Prof. Suryanarayana Doolla should be placed under immediate suspension* In a statement released by student representatives they clarified their intention for the demand stating they demanded that he step down from his position as Dean of Administrative Affiars in order to prevent any conflict of interest with the ongoing investigation , and all stakeholders found guilty once the investigation concludes should be removed from their positions.

Director’s response:
The Director understands the demand and that the investigation is in place. The matter will be discussed in the BoG meeting on the morning of 21 September, with a communication by 12 PM on 21st September by the Director, on Webmail (Student Notices)

Update as of 21 September:

Prof. Doolla has been suspended from his position as Dean of Administrative Affairs, as stated in an email sent out on Webmail by the Director at 12 PM on 21 September.

Demand 2:
IIT Bombay should immediately and publicly apologise for the defamation of Sahil through the partial and explicit details included in the LinkedIn post.

Director’s response:
The Director agrees with this. He personally understands the issue and is ready to apologise publicly on the IIT Bombay LinkedIn handle by 12 PM on 21st September 

Update as of 21 September:

An apology was posted on IITB’s official LinkedIn account on 21 September expressing regret for statements made in the previous communication.

Demand 3:
An open house with all stakeholders involved, including the Director, Dean SA, Dean AP and HOD of Sahil’s department, where students can put their concerns and questions regarding the incident to them directly. The open house should be scheduled before September 22, 2026.

Director’s response:
An Open House will be held in the Convocation Hall with all the requisite stakeholders. The investigation is pending, so confidential matters will not be disclosed. Whatever is known will be made completely transparent. He also announced that regular lectures will not take place until the conduct of the Open House.

Update as of 21 September:

An Open House was held in the Convocation Hall at 5 PM on 21 September in the presence of the Director, Deputy Director (ART), Deputy Director (FIA), Dean (AP), Dean (SA), and Head of the Department of Energy Science and Engineering as panellists. They were later joined by the Associate Dean (Student Wellness). 

Demand 4:
The Director, Dean AP, and Dean SA should resign if points 5 to 14 are not met within one month of the date of this letter. Weekly updates should be sent regarding the status of all points until the demands are met.

Director’s response:
The Director agrees to points 5–14 being completed by 21 October 2026. Weekly transparency on the points will be maintained. Since a lot of points involve the representation of students in committees, active participation from students will be required. The Director will be responsible for the overall progress of the committees. 

Demand 5:
An independent panel of professors, student representatives, external members, and members recommended by the student representatives, formed to investigate the circumstances that led to Sahil’s demise, including the emergency and hospital response. The process followed, and the conclusions of the committee should be made public before October 15, 2026. An interim report should be submitted by September 30, 2026.

Director’s response:
The Director accepts the demand. The proceedings of the committee will be subject to confidentiality. The reports containing the process and conclusion will be made public on the respective due dates. 

Demand 6:
Fair and prompt monetary support for all four families who lost a loved one in recent months at IIT Bombay, decided in consultation with them, along with continued support from the Institute.

Director’s response:
Agreement on the provision of monetary support. Creation and mobilisation of funds to support families will happen, and complete transparency will be maintained. He further mentioned that funds will be raised for other students in need and not just for the deceased.

Demand 7:
Voting power for student representatives in all academic and non-academic committees concerning students. Any such committee should have equal representation from students. The administration should not have veto power over the student voice, i.e., the reports of these committees should be signed by all members of the committee.

Director’s response:
Equal student representation will be present, and the details of the attendees of each meeting will be created according to the purpose of the agenda and committee. Due to the special nature of the number of attendees in the Senate (350 professors and 6 students, approximately), it may be difficult to have equal representation. Hence, a separate system will be created for the Senate Meetings. There will be no representation of students on the Board of Governors. 

Demand 8:
Decisions that affect the student culture of IIT Bombay and were enforced on students without any consultation should be re-evaluated, taking student opinion into account.

Director’s response:
The Director agreed to this demand; however, cited the need to sensitise the students present in the committee as well as those outside of it. All decisions will be approved only once a consensus has been reached 

Immediate reversal of a decision is not possible, but it will be reevaluated through a committee. 

Another consensus that was reached during this discussion is that open houses should be held regularly, the frequency of which will be decided subsequently.

Demand 9:
Formation of a committee to define the process for complaints against professors, and an escalation process that includes a proper timeline for the evaluation of all cases.

Director’s response:
The Director agreed to this. A committee and document for DAC will be formed for professors and will be made public. The Director will be answerable for the committee’s work and completion. The existing procedure for student grievance redressal will be examined. 

Demand 10:
When a student is caught committing any malpractice, the matter should not be dealt with in complete isolation. The student’s mentor (ISMP/DAMP) or student companion (ISCP/IRSCP), and a student buddy (chosen by the student), should be informed immediately by the professors/staff, and all interactions on the case should be documented and held with the knowledge of these persons, so that the student is supported and treated fairly.

Director’s response:
Records of the buddies, as chosen by the student, can be created and shared with the students and faculty advisors. These buddies will be contacted in case any student is caught in any malpractice.

Additional discussion on this point led to the following consensus: The student should not be alone in a DAC committee proceeding. Every stakeholder of the committee should receive the transcript of the committee. All DACs whose meetings have not been conducted on official accounts must be revoked.

Demand 11:
The Institute should have a minimum of one counsellor for every 250 students on campus to reduce waiting times for students, along with regular independent audits of SWC performed by an independent committee, a summary of which should be shared with students. At least one counsellor should be present in each hostel.

Director’s response:
The Institute is already working with a private agency to supply the demand. The counsellor ratio will be improved to 1:250.

Demand 12:
A psychiatrist on call round the clock at the IIT Bombay Hospital, better-qualified emergency and night-shift doctors who can handle student health conditions, and regular mental health training for all hospital staff, including nurses. A regular feedback mechanism should be established to address students’ concerns about the hospital.

Director’s response:
Agreed. Students will be a part of the committees in a decision-making capacity that deal with the above point; however, implementation is the responsibility of the Institute. Students shall not be involved in the execution aspect. 

Demand 13:
A compulsory sensitisation workshop for all professors and staff who directly interact with students, held once every two months and included in onboarding. If students must undergo training, so must professors.

Director’s response:
The Director agreed to the demand. The sensitisation of all professors and staff who directly interact with students will be revamped. 

Demand 14:
At least 20 hours of dedicated time every week from the Dean SA office for 1-on-1 interactions addressing day-to-day student problems, with a written reply to each concern raised within 48 hours. The Dean (SA) office must release slots for these interactions at the start of every week.

Director’s response:
The Director agreed to the demand. 

Demand 15:
The administration should support students in bringing their wings back together and ensure that wings remain intact in the future, in the second and third year, with rooms adjacent to each other, so that the support network among wingmates is not broken.

Director’s response:
The Director agreed to the demand. The administration will support the student reps who will take the lead in bringing the wings back together. 

Demand 16:
A portal where students can raise institute-wide concerns, with all posts and the administration’s responses visible to the entire student community.

Director’s response:
The Director agreed to the demand. The specifics of the portal will be worked out in more detail. 

Demand 17:
A standing task force of students, faculty, mental health professionals and external experts to study the causes of student distress, recommend preventive measures, and publish a semester-wise report for all residents of the IIT Bombay campus.

Director’s response:
The Director agrees with the point in the letter. A task force will be formed under the Anil Sahastrabuddhe Committee. It will talk to students every week, and a report will be released every semester.

Demand 18:
No disciplinary, hostel, financial or legal action, and no indirect penalty, against any student for taking part in this peaceful protest. We request a written assurance to this effect.

Director’s response:
No action will be taken against any protester at the site.

The Registrar and Deputy Director (ART) also arrived on the scene during the discussion on the demands. Students also raised an additional demand to review the one-year suspension imposed as punishment for certain academic malpractices, after putting forth the above demands. The Director responded positively, stating that a committee with 50% student representation would re-evaluate the matter as well. 

Several additional demands were also raised, including reformative action instead of punitive disciplinary action, particularly hostel expulsion and the establishment of a Suicide Prevention Task Force, among others.

The Director’s signature was then taken, acknowledging the receipt of the demands. After the signing, a minute of silence was again observed, following which the administration representatives left the site. Following this, slogans were raised, and skirmishes between the different student groups also took place. Most students dispersed subsequently, while some continued the sit-in, stating that they had not been able to adequately voice their concerns.

21 September 2026

As conveyed on 20 September, all classes were cancelled for 21st September, following the Director’s agreement to suspend lectures until the conclusion of the Open House.

At 12 PM on 21 September, the following email was sent by the Director to all students:

An apology was also posted on IITB’s official LinkedIn account expressing regret for statements made in a communication posted on 19 September.

Around the same time, several faculty members gathered at the Main Building in solidarity for Prof. Doolla. The peaceful gathering was led by the IIT Bombay Faculty Forum. The Director addressed the gathered professors at the LT-PCSA.

At 12:45 PM, students received an email informing them that the Open House had been scheduled for 7 PM on the same day at the Convocation Hall. A Google Form was circulated to collect questions from students who wished to stay anonymous or were unable to attend the Open House.

At 1:50 PM, students were informed that the Open House had been postponed to a new date.

Meanwhile, the faculty had organised a march in solidarity with Prof. Doolla from the Main Building, scheduled to start at 5 PM. Students also joined this cause and circulated a Google Form on social media to garner public support for the same. 

At 4:10 PM, students were informed via Webmail that the previously postponed Open House would be conducted at 5 PM the same day. The solidarity march of the faculty members and the students coincided with this time. Owing to this sudden announcement, there was confusion about whether the march would be held or not. 

The Open House began at 5:45 PM. The Director, the Deputy Director (FIA), the Deputy Director (ART), the Dean (SA), the Dean (AP), and the HoD of the Energy Science and Engineering Department, joined later by the Associate Dean (SW), were present as panel members. The audience was comprised primarily of students when the dialogue began. 

The discussion was divided into two phases, with the first phase comprising moderators asking questions compiled from the Google Form circulated on Webmail. In the second phase, members of the audience were invited to put forward questions directly to the administration. 209 questions were submitted in the Google Form by 5 PM. This number reached 250 when questioning began. 

Phase 1 included questions on the delayed appointment schedules at the SWC, sensitisation training for faculty, and the handling of disagreements between student representatives and the administration, among other concerns. 

During the initial proceedings of the Open House, faculty members and students continued the organised solidarity march for Prof. Doolla at the previously stipulated time, 5 PM. Following the march, they arrived at the Convocation Hall at 6:20 PM and stood silently on one side of the Hall, holding posters expressing support for Prof. Doolla. 

The Director acknowledged their presence and said he noted and understood their sentiments. Several students present in the Convocation Hall also joined the faculty members to extend their support for the Professor.

As Phase 1 came to a close, the members present in the march took their seats, and a queue was formed for Phase 2 of the Open House, in which the audience could ask questions. Before Phase 2 began, a clarification statement was read on behalf of student representatives, stating that the students wanted Prof. Doolla’s temporary relief from his duties as Dean of Administrative Affairs to enable an independent and unbiased investigation. Any statement or permanent action against or for the professor should not be made without due investigation. 

The next phase saw students put forward questions to the administration on various grievances. These included personal incidents, suggestions, and questions involving an insufficient mental health ecosystem and support from the institute, hostel infrastructure, lack of common spaces, grievance redressal mechanisms for students, and communication between student representatives and the masses. The Open House session concluded at 8:45 PM, following which members of the administration, faculty and student community began to disperse.

The detailed minutes of the Open House are expected to be made public soon. 

A second press release was issued by the IIT Bombay Faculty Forum dated 21st September. 

Close to midnight, a “Statement from Student Representatives, IIT Bombay” was also released. As the day drew to a close, several students remained at the Main Gate site in protest, with the Main Gate remaining closed and entry and exit taking place through YP Gate.

Insight hopes that the conduct of the Open House sets a positive precedent for future such dialogues and that the discussions lead to meaningful and substantive changes in addressing students’ grievances.