Mumbai witnessed a tense Sunday as police detained 140 people at two locations in Dadar, where a candlelight vigil for IIT Bombay student Sahil Wakode and a separate protest by tribal students were both stopped on the ground that they did not have permission.
Among those taken into preventive custody at Chaityabhoomi was stand-up comedian Masoom Rajwani, whose detention quickly became a talking point on social media and drew fresh attention to a case that has stirred anger among students for more than a month.
According to police officials quoted in multiple reports, about 120 people who had gathered at Shivaji Park for an unauthorised protest described as an "Adivasi Gen Z" demonstration were rounded up and taken to a local police station. Separately, 20 to 25 people who had assembled at Chaityabhoomi in Dadar for a candlelight march in memory of Wakode were also detained.
Officials said the gatherings lacked the necessary permissions and that precautions were being taken to maintain law and order in the area. The process of completing formalities and releasing the detainees was under way on Sunday evening, police said.
Chaityabhoomi carries deep symbolic weight in Mumbai. It is the cremation site of Dr B. R. Ambedkar, the chief architect of the Indian Constitution, and it has long been a place where people gather to remember struggles for dignity and equality. That a vigil for a young Dalit student was stopped there added to the sense of grievance expressed by many of those who had come to take part.
The Progressive Students Union had organised the candlelight march at Chaityabhoomi to demand justice in Wakode's case, and visuals from the spot showed a heavy police presence as participants were taken into custody.
The detentions at Shivaji Park were linked to a wider set of demands raised by tribal students and youth workers. Those who had planned to hold a "Janakrosh Morcha" were seeking the resignation of Maharashtra Tribal Development Minister Ashok Uike, as well as the tribal development department's commissioner and secretary. Their protest, like the vigil, was described by police as unauthorised.
The convergence of the two gatherings in the same part of the city on the same evening meant that a large police deployment was already in place when the candlelight march began, and both groups were dispersed within hours.
Wakode, a student at the Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, was found dead in his hostel room on September 18. Reports at the time said his death came hours after he was allegedly caught using a mobile phone during a mid-semester examination.
His parents and student groups have alleged that he faced torture and caste-based discrimination, claims that have turned his death into a focal point for debates about the experiences of Dalit and Adivasi students in elite institutions. The family and campus groups have pressed for a thorough investigation and accountability, and the case has been raised repeatedly in student protests since September.
A police complaint in the case named professor Suryanarayana Doolla and invoked provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act alongside abetment of suicide. The Mumbai Crime Branch has recorded statements from more than 40 people in connection with the investigation. Those details, reported by multiple outlets, underline that the case is being treated as a criminal inquiry and not only as a campus disciplinary matter.
At the same time, the precise circumstances of Wakode's death remain the subject of an ongoing investigation, and the allegations made by his family and supporters have not been adjudicated in court.
The use of preventive custody on Sunday has itself become part of the debate. Police routinely detain people for a short period when they believe an unlawful assembly could disturb public order, and officials said on Sunday that the gatherings had not obtained permission. Critics of the action argue that a peaceful candlelight vigil is a legitimate form of mourning and protest, and that stopping it at a site associated with Ambedkar sends a particularly poor message.
Supporters of the police action point to the need to keep order in a crowded part of the city and to the rule that public gatherings require prior permission. The tension between those two positions is familiar in Mumbai, where permission for protests is frequently contested.
Rajwani's detention drew particular notice because he is a public figure, and posts about the vigil circulated widely online on Sunday evening. Some commentators described the detentions as an overreaction to a peaceful gathering, while others said the police were applying the same rules to all unauthorised assemblies.
What is not in dispute is the basic sequence of events: a vigil was planned, police stopped it, and the participants were taken away for formalities before release. The episode has ensured that Wakode's case, which might otherwise have faded from headlines, remains firmly in public view.
The case also sits within a longer and painful history. Students from marginalised communities have repeatedly spoken about isolation, discrimination and pressure inside some of India's most competitive institutions, and each high-profile death renews calls for stronger support systems, clearer grievance mechanisms and faster action on complaints.
Wakode's supporters argue that his death should prompt institutions to examine not only what happened in one examination hall, but also the broader environment in which students from Dalit and Adivasi backgrounds study. Others caution against drawing conclusions before the investigation is complete, while agreeing that student welfare systems need strengthening.
For the authorities, the immediate questions are practical ones. The investigation into Wakode's death continues, with the Crime Branch having already spoken to dozens of people. The detainees from Sunday are being processed for release.
And the demands raised by tribal students, including those concerning the tribal development department, remain unanswered in public. Whether the state government or the institute responds to those demands in the coming days will determine whether Sunday's detentions calm the situation or deepen the sense of grievance.
What happened on Sunday also raises a broader question about how Indian cities handle protest. Permission regimes are meant to balance the right to assemble with the need to manage traffic, safety and competing uses of public space. In practice, refusals or last-minute police action often leave protesters feeling that the rules are applied selectively, while police say they are bound to act when gatherings are unauthorised.
Finding a more predictable and transparent process, in which organisers know in advance whether they can gather and under what conditions, would reduce the scope for confrontation at events such as vigils, which are by nature quiet and short.
For now, the focus returns to Wakode's family and to the investigation. His parents have sought justice for their son, and student groups have vowed to keep pressing the case until they believe the truth has been established. Sunday's vigil was intended as an act of remembrance.
That it ended in detentions has, paradoxically, made the remembrance more visible, and it has linked the demand for justice in one student's death to wider questions about dignity, representation and the right to be heard in public space. Those questions are unlikely to be settled by one evening's police action, and they will follow the investigation wherever it leads.
(Reporting based on The Hindu, The Times of India and The New Indian Express.)