The Indian Institute of Technology Bombay is reportedly reviewing its disciplinary policy for examination-related misconduct, including a provision that can result in a one-semester academic suspension.

The possible review comes amid student protests and renewed discussion around the institute’s approach to handling allegations of examination malpractice. The move could lead to changes in how penalties are decided in future cases.

Suspension Provision Under Review

According to information shared by a student familiar with the matter, IIT Bombay is considering temporarily putting the existing suspension provision on hold while examining whether elements of its earlier disciplinary framework should be brought back.

The issue is expected to be considered by the institute’s relevant authorities as part of a broader assessment of its procedures for dealing with academic misconduct.

However, there appears to be some uncertainty among students about whether any formal decision has already been taken. Another student said they had not received an official communication, notice or email informing students about such a change.

Developments Following Student Protests

The reported review follows the death of second-year BTech student Sahil Wakode. He was reportedly found with a mobile phone and using ChatGPT during an examination on September 18.

The incident was followed by student demonstrations and discussions about IIT Bombay’s examination rules, disciplinary measures and the way suspected malpractice cases are addressed.

The circumstances have brought increased attention to whether the existing punishment structure adequately distinguishes between different forms and degrees of academic misconduct.

What the 2026 Rules Provide

Under the disciplinary framework introduced by IIT Bombay in July 2026, certain examination violations involving unauthorised materials or electronic devices can attract an FR2 grade as well as a one-semester academic suspension.

The provision covers the possession or use of prohibited electronic equipment during examinations. This includes devices such as mobile phones, tablets and smartwatches, along with technology capable of providing AI-assisted support.

The framework also allows for stronger disciplinary consequences when a student is found to have repeatedly engaged in academic malpractice. Repeat violations can carry a minimum suspension period of one semester.

How the Earlier Framework Differed

A review of the institute’s earlier disciplinary guidelines from 2015 indicates a comparatively narrower use of suspension. Under that framework, suspension was generally associated with more serious violations, including impersonation, certain offences involving documents and serious or repeated instances of misconduct.

A return to some elements of the previous system could therefore result in penalties being determined more specifically according to the nature and seriousness of an individual case.

Focus May Extend Beyond Punishment

The review is also expected to examine the procedures followed when examination malpractice is suspected, rather than focusing solely on the punishment imposed afterward.

Student protests have prompted wider discussion about the need for a clearer and more consistent standard operating procedure for invigilators. Such guidelines could establish how suspected violations should be identified, documented and escalated before disciplinary action is taken.

The final outcome could determine whether IIT Bombay continues with a broad one-semester suspension provision or adopts a more graduated system in which penalties vary according to factors such as the nature of the violation, the circumstances surrounding it and whether the student has previously committed a similar offence.

What Happens Next

No final change to the disciplinary framework can be assumed until IIT Bombay formally announces its decision.

If the proposed review results in amendments, the institute’s revised policy is likely to provide greater clarity on the consequences of examination malpractice and the process that should precede disciplinary action. The decision will also establish whether the one-semester suspension remains a standard penalty or is replaced with a more case-specific approach.