IIT-Bombay student suicide case: ‘SIT is ignoring caste discrimination’

The SIT is deliberately covering up the larger issue of caste discrimination, which caused my son to end his life," said Ramesh Solanki, the father of 18-year-old Dalit student Darshan Solanki who was found dead on the IIT Bombay campus in February. The deceased's immediate family and economist and ex-MP Bhalchandra Mungekar addressed media persons in the city on Thursday. Ramesh Solanki, his wife Tarlika and daughter Janhvi alleged that caste discrimination was the main issue but the system and SIT were overlooking it.

The deceased's father said, "It has been three months since the death of my son Darshan Solanki, a first-year BTech student who was facing severe caste discrimination. Despite that, the Powai police registered an accidental death report (ADR) instead of an FIR. Later, with public pressure mounting and amid demands that a special investigation team (SIT) be formed to investigate the matter, the Maharashtra government formed a three-member SIT. We are in anguish and concerned about the continuous sidelining of the incidences of caste discrimination."

Serious concerns

Expressing serious concerns over the SIT investigation, Mungekar said, "On February 12 [the day of the alleged suicide], when the parents reached IIT Bombay, they were not allowed to see their son's body. On February 13, they were allowed to see it only after the post-mortem. How can they conduct a post-mortem without the family's consent? Despite repeated appeals, the FIR in the matter was registered only on March 30. Why the delay?"

Janhvi Solanki, Bhalchandra Mungekar and Ramesh Solanki address the media in south Mumbai on Thursday. Pics/Shadab Khan

He added, "The SIT is totally sidelining the caste discrimination angle. We want to appeal to the state government to investigate the matter with caste discrimination as the main factor in the case. It was the caste discrimination faced by Darshan at the campus and hostel that compelled him to end his life. We want to know what is preventing the SIT from investigating the case from this angle. Why was the IIT director not investigated? He is the one who should ensure law and order are there on the campus."

Also Read: IIT Bombay suicide case: Mere allegations in suicide note not sufficient to conclude accused committed offence of abetment, says Mumbai court

‘IIT SC/ST cell an eyewash'

Mungekar also termed the IIT Bombay's SC/ ST cell an eyewash and said no meetings are conducted there. According to Darshan's father, a note found by the authorities - on the basis of which 19-year-old Arman Khatri, the deceased's roommate, was arrested - was not written by his son. "They showed us the note which they claimed was written by my son. ‘Arman killed me' was written in the corner of the note. My daughter and I both confirmed that it was not Darshan's handwriting," Ramesh Solanki said.

According to the family, Darshan first spoke to his aunt Divyaben about his ordeal but asked her not to speak about this to his father. "He told his aunt that he would be fine and would bear it as it was just a matter of four years," Ramesh Solanki said.

Janhvi said, "Whether Arman is guilty or not, we are not even getting into it. There is no clear evidence for that. However, when my brother visited us in January, he told me that he faced name-calling. Some students mocked him, laughed at him and called him a Dalit. My brother said that often when he wanted to join his fellow hostellers and classmates in group study sessions or at meal time, they would mock him, saying, ‘Dekho Dalit aaya'."

According to the family, in the second week of April, Janhvi, stumbled upon Darshan's social media accounts while trying to log into social media. She came across a chat that Darshan had had with one Sam Rajput on Instagram on February 7, just a few days before his death.

‘Undue advantage'

During their conversation, Rajput asked Darshan what was his IIT-JEE rank. Darshan reluctantly shared this information. Darshan went on to say in the chat that since Sam now knew he belonged to a certain reserved category, he would probably "also not like him anymore, like the others". Darshan also added in the chat that Sam mustn't think that reserved-category students receive an undue advantage. "After that day, there weren't any more chat messages with this Sam Rajput," added Janhvi.

The family is concerned about Darshan's apprehension about another person also not liking him. It is telling of the fact that in Darshan's experience at IIT- Bombay, people stopped liking him after they learned that he was a reserved category student It is yet another evidence of caste discrimination he faced in a line of so many that have already been revealed, showing that he was isolated, taunted and ostracised due to his caste.

Many people have already submitted testimonies regarding the caste discrimination that Darshan allegedly faced at IIT Bombay. These testimonies include the statements given by Uday Singh Meena, a fellow student, and the family members, including Janhvi and Divyaben.

‘Darshan was harassed'

In their statements, they all emphasised that Darshan was being harassed because of his caste. He even wanted to change his room because of the harassment he faced from his roommate, they claimed. His peers mocked him for his questions about the things he was struggling to understand, the family has alleged.

Mungekar said, "We are already consulting our lawyer on the next course of action. While Arman Khatri was arrested on charges under the Atrocities Act, the SIT did not investigate it as a case of caste discrimination. The system has failed Darshan Solanki and students like him who are forced to end their lives owing to caste discrimination."