# Parents of IIT Bombay Student Sahil Wakode Seek Police Protection Following Campus Death

> Following the death of second-year IIT Bombay student Sahil Wakode, his parents have formally requested immediate police protection citing intimidation risks and media leaks.

**Type:** article · **Category:** Maharashtra · **Published:** 2026-09-30 · **Source:** TrendKia
**Canonical:** https://trendkia.com/en/maharashtra/iit-bombay-chhatra-sahil-wakode-ki-mauta-mamale-men-mata-pita-ne-mangi-pulisa-suraksha-kamishnara-ko-bheja-patra-40409 · **Language:** English
**Tags:** IIT Bombay, Sahil Wakode, Mumbai Police, Powai Police Station, Crime Branch, Police Protection, SC ST Act

In the aftermath of the tragic death of Indian Institute of Technology Bombay student Sahil Wakode, his grieving family has formally approached law enforcement authorities seeking immediate personal security. On September 29, Advocate Nikhil Kamble, representing the student's father Ravindra Wakode and mother Sonali Wakode, submitted an official memorandum addressed to the Mumbai Police Commissioner, the Joint Commissioner of Police for Law and Order, and the Joint Commissioner of the Crime Branch, pressing for round-the-clock protection.

## Details of the FIR and Ongoing Investigation
Sahil Wakode, who was enrolled in the second year of his academic programme at IIT Bombay, died inside his hostel room on September 18, 2026. Following the incident, an official First Information Report, registered under FIR number 999/2026, was lodged at the Powai Police Station. The police invoked Section 108 of the Indian Penal Code alongside Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The comprehensive probe has since been reassigned and is currently handled by Detection Unit-1 of the Mumbai Crime Branch.

## Named Individuals and Lack of Custodial Action
The legal communication highlights that several individuals are named in connection with the complaint, including IIT Bombay Director Prof. Shireesh B., alongside Kedar and Prof. Suryanarayana Dola, among others. Advocate Kamble brought to the notice of senior police leadership that none of the persons named in the FIR have been arrested so far, which has exacerbated the family's anxieties regarding potential witness tampering and obstruction of justice.

## Threat Perceptions and Statutory Protection Rights
The memorandum emphasizes that safety concerns escalated significantly after specific examination-related CCTV footage involving Sahil was aired on certain news channels on September 23. Apprehending severe coercion, intimidation, and undue external pressure, the family has requested dedicated police cover at their residence as well as comprehensive transit security during travel mandated by investigative interrogations and judicial hearings. The representation explicitly cites Section 15A of the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act, pointing out the statutory obligation of the state machinery to protect victims, their dependents, and witnesses from any intimidation, harassment, or violent retaliation.

## What this means for you
The family's formal request for protection underscores the critical role of statutory witness and victim safeguards during ongoing criminal investigations.

- **Across India:** The development highlights legal provisions under the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act designed to shield complainants from coercion during high-profile cases. Families facing institutional disputes can invoke these statutory mandates to safeguard witnesses and dependents.
- **In Mumbai:** Law enforcement agencies face heightened accountability to balance investigative progress with the immediate safety needs of the complainant family. Local police authorities are expected to review threat assessments and manage secure transit during court proceedings.
- **For Academic Campuses:** Higher educational institutions encounter renewed scrutiny regarding student welfare and administrative protocols following campus fatalities. Internal leadership may face increased demands for institutional transparency during external police inquiries.
- **For Citizens:** Any individual involved in sensitive legal proceedings where evidence or media leaks spark safety concerns can formally petition police leadership for protective cover. Understanding these statutory protections empowers families to assert their rights before investigative bodies.

## Why this happened
The demand for personal protection stems from the unauthorized release of sensitive evidence to the press and the perceived risk from influential individuals named in the police complaint.

- **Unauthorized CCTV Broadcast:** On September 23, internal examination-related surveillance footage involving the student was aired on several television news networks. This public disclosure intensified the family's apprehension regarding their vulnerability to external harassment.
- **Absence of Custodial Action:** Despite the registration of serious criminal charges naming the institute's director and other faculty members, no arrests have been executed. The family fears that the lack of detention could allow influential suspects to exert pressure or intimidate key witnesses.
- **Statutory Mandates Under Special Law:** Section 15A of the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act explicitly mandates state protection for victims, their dependents, and witnesses against any form of intimidation. The family's counsel invoked this exact legal provision to compel senior police intervention.

## Questions & Answers

### 1. Who was Sahil Wakode and when did the incident occur?
Sahil Wakode was a second-year student at IIT Bombay who died in his campus hostel on September 18, 2026.

### 2. Why have Sahil's parents requested police protection?
His parents sought protection fearing intimidation and undue pressure after examination CCTV footage was broadcast on news channels on September 23.

### 3. What legal charges have been invoked in the police complaint?
FIR number 999/2026 at Powai Police Station includes Section 108 of the IPC and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act.

### 4. Who are the individuals named in the complaint?
The complaint names IIT Bombay Director Prof. Shireesh B., along with Kedar and Prof. Suryanarayana Dola, among others.

### 5. Which investigative agency is currently probing the case?
The case is currently being investigated by Detection Unit-1 of the Mumbai Crime Branch.

### 6. Which statutory provision was cited to seek security?
The counsel cited Section 15A of the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act, which obligates the state to safeguard victims and witnesses from threats.

---
_TrendKia — Har trend, sabse pehle.. Machine-readable view; canonical HTML at the URL above._