Three suicides at IISER Kolkata—Sagar Mandal (2017), Subhadip Roy (2022), and Anamitra Roy (2025)—all linked to the same research supervisor. Allegations of ragging, harassment, fact-finding manipulation, and nepotism point to a systemic crisis hidden in plain sight.
A Tragic Pattern That Can No Longer Be Called Coincidence
Over the past eight years, IISER Kolkata—a premier science institute—has seen three promising lives end in shocking tragedy: Sagar Mandal (2017), Subhadip Roy (2022), and Anamitra Roy (2025). Different years, different circumstances—but one chilling constant: the same research supervisor is linked to all three cases.
What were once treated as isolated incidents are now part of a growing storm of allegations—of systemic neglect, institutional cover-ups, and nepotism so entrenched that it might have cost lives.
The First Death: Sagar Mandal (2017)
Sagar Mandal, a second-year undergraduate, came from a financially struggling background. His peers say he was bright but burdened—by exam pressure, lack of mental health support, and the sudden abolition of IISER’s mentorship system.
The original internal fact-finding report reportedly flagged exam anxiety and psychological strain as major contributors. But the version sent to the Ministry erased these observations, labeling his suicide a “spur-of-the-moment act.” Student groups like COSTISA condemned this whitewashing as an attempt to protect the institute’s image rather than address its failings.
The Second Death: Subhadip Roy (2022)
Five years later, the cycle repeated. Subhadip Roy, an integrated PhD student, was found dead in a physics lab. His family alleged ragging and harassment. Friends whispered that the same supervisory environment that had failed Sagar was again at play—but the official narrative remained sanitized, with no substantial institutional introspection.
The Most Recent Tragedy: Anamitra Roy (2025)
The breaking point came this August. Anamitra Roy, a 25-year-old autistic PhD scholar, collapsed in his lab after ingesting a massive dose of medication. Hours before, he posted online, detailing bullying by a fellow scholar, indifference from his supervisor, and silence from the anti-ragging cell.
In his statement, he named both his alleged abuser and his research guide—the same one connected to Sagar and Subhadip. He accused the institute of ignoring his repeated cries for help.
The Web of Nepotism
Here’s where the allegations deepen:
- The Dean of Student Affairs at the time—who also chaired the anti-ragging cell—was closely connected to the accused’s academic circle.
- His wife reportedly worked in the same lab as the alleged bully and had professional ties to the supervisor in question.
- Students claim this created a clear conflict of interest, compromising the impartiality of any investigation.
The Fact-Finding Committees: A History of Whitewashing
In all three deaths, the fact-finding process has been described by insiders as opaque and manipulated:
- Key witness testimonies allegedly omitted from final reports.
- Critical findings reframed to remove institutional responsibility.
- Committees stacked with individuals who had professional or personal ties to the very people under scrutiny.
The pattern is disturbingly consistent—investigate, sanitize, move on.
The Institute’s Response
IISER Kolkata has announced a fresh fact-finding panel for Anamitra’s case. But given the history, students and alumni are skeptical. “We’ve seen this movie before,” says one former student. “They protect their own. The rest of us are disposable.”
Why This Matters Beyond IISER
This is not just about one institute. Across India, elite research institutions are repeatedly accused of being toxic for vulnerable students, particularly those from marginalized backgrounds or with mental health challenges. Academic hierarchy, when combined with nepotism, creates a dangerous power imbalance—one that can become lethal.
A Call for Independent Investigation
Families of all three students are now demanding:
- A CBI or court-monitored probe into the deaths.
- Public release of all internal reports.
- Reform of supervisory and anti-ragging structures to remove conflicts of interest.
Until that happens, the same question will haunt IISER Kolkata: How many more?