IIT Kharagpur student found dead in hostel room
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel
Kolkata: A fourth-year undergraduate student of the Indian Institute of Technology-Kharagpur (IIT-KGP) was found dead in his hostel room on Friday morning. Ritam Mondal was a student of Mechanical Engineering. He was found dead in his hostel room this morning.The administration has initiated the process of filing an FIR and the necessary actions as per law. The police have initiated an investigation into the incident, and the Institute is extending full cooperation to facilitate the process, the institute said.IIT-KGP has constituted a fact-finding committee to examine the incident and report at the earliest.'With deep sorrow, the Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur regrets to inform of the untimely demise of Ritam Mondal, a fourth-year undergraduate student of the Department of Mechanical Engineering. Mondal was found deceased in his room at Rajendra Prasad Hall of Residence on the morning of July 18, 2025,' IIT-KGP authorities said in a statement.The Institute's security response team acted swiftly and reached the hostel premises. The Institute's medical team, the Director, senior administrative officials, and local police authorities arrived. Immediate communication was also made with Mondal's family, the institute said.It has been learned that Mondal had recently returned to campus after the long summer vacation and resumed his classes.'As per the records reviewed from the Institute's SARTH Counselling Centre, there were no prior indicators of mental health concerns. The faculty advisor from the department also mentioned that there were no apparent academic or non-academic issues that caught their attention,' the Institute said.Mondal was known for his academic diligence and gentle demeanor. The Institute expresses its heartfelt condolences to his bereaved family and friends and stands committed to supporting them during this difficult time.The Director, while expressing extreme distress as a parent-like individual at this shocking incident, reiterated that the Institute is already in the process of developing a holistic intervention program combining cutting-edge technology, super-specialized expert support, and highly personalised interaction for the well-being of all students, with a mission of ensuring that such an incident never occurs again.'As part of its continued efforts to support student well-being, the Institute confirms the availability of dedicated mental health and counselling services around the clock. Furthermore, IIT Kharagpur is set to launch a new AI-driven mental wellness initiative, SETU, on July 25, 2025, to enhance proactive mental health support for students,' IIT-KGP said in a statement.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
SC questions Gr Noida varsity delay in reporting student suicide, calls for ‘lawful' probe
New Delhi The bench refused to pass any further order, directing the probe to proceed. (Representative photo) The Supreme Court on Monday called for the probe into student suicide deaths at Sharda University and IIT Kharagpur to proceed 'expeditiously, in accordance with the law', while questioning the silence of Sharda University in reporting the incident and directing IIT Kharagpur to ascertain the reason for four student deaths at the institute over the past seven months. A bench of justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan had taken suo motu cognisance of the two incidents as part of its broader directions passed in March for setting up a National Task Force (NTF) to identify causes behind increasing student suicides. 'We are doing this for our children, our progeny,' it said, as it took up responses filed by the two educational institutions explaining their conduct. The court was informed by amicus curiae senior advocate Aparna Bhat that in the Sharda University case, the complaint was lodged by the student's parent after two hours had lapsed since the discovery of the body at the college hostel room on July 18. Bhat pointed out that the father was informed of the incident by students, and that the management failed to inform the police and parents. 'You (management) should have informed…Was it not your duty to immediately inform the police and parents?' the bench asked senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for the university. The amicus curiae told the court that a note left by the student, a 24-year-old second-year Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS) student, led to the arrest of two members of the faculty. The bench refused to pass any further order, while noting, 'Our concern was the investigation should proceed. We will not say anything further as it may prejudice the investigation.' The court also sought to know the progress of the investigation into the death reported from IIT Kharagpur. The amicus pointed out that the IIT administration had informed the police after they discovered that a fourth-year student had committed suicide in the hostel room. The incident took place soon after he joined classes upon returning from vacation at home. The court said, 'What is wrong with IIT Kharagpur? Why are students committing suicide? Have you given it any thought?' Senior advocate MR Shamshad, appearing for the IIT administration, told the court that a 10-member committee has been constituted to probe the present incident. He said that, in addition, a 12-member counselling committee was established by the institute for students to report their problems. Bhat informed the court that she could not carry out a spot visit to IIT Kharagpur, but confirmed that a complaint was lodged, converted into an FIR, and an investigation is ongoing. 'Let investigation in both matters proceed expeditiously in accordance with law and in the right direction,' the court said in its order, while posting the matter after four weeks. In March, the court constituted a National Task Force (NTF) to probe into the larger issue of student suicides across the country and the systemic changes required to address this issue. The NTF is headed by former Supreme Court judge S Ravindra Bhat and is expected to submit its preliminary report in September.
The Hindu
7 hours ago
- The Hindu
31 operational aircraft inspected after Air India crash: Minister of State for Civil Aviation
Following the crash of Air India flight AI-171 at Ahmedabad, 31 operational aircraft of the airline were inspected and there were minor findings observed in eight aircraft, Minister of State for Civil Aviation Murlidhar Mohol said. 'Out of total 33 aircraft, 31 operational aircraft have been inspected wherein minor findings were observed in 8 aircraft. These aircraft have been released for operation post rectification. The remaining 2 aircraft are under scheduled maintenance,' he said. Responding to a question raised by DMK MP Kanimozhi NVN Somu in the Rajya Sabha, Mr Mohol said, the eight aircraft were pressed into operations after rectification. Mr Mohol said, Director General, Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) ordered an investigation after the air crash. Also, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) ordered Air India to do additional checks on all 33 Boeing 787-8/9, he added. He noted that DGCA has a systematic safety oversight mechanism to check the compliance of Rules and Civil Aviation Requirements for all the aircraft and the airport operators. 'The safety oversight process includes regular and periodic audits, spot checks, night surveillance and ramp inspections across all operators, including continuous oversight of maintenance practices,' he said.
Time of India
8 hours ago
- Time of India
Alleged cash discovery: Why did you wait, Supreme Court asks Justice Varma
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel The Supreme Court on Monday asked Allahabad High Court Judge Yashwant Varma why he appeared before a committee constituted to probe an alleged cash discovery at his official residence in New Delhi if he felt that it had no legal power to investigate the matter."Why did you not challenge when the committee was appointed? Why did you wait? Why did you appear before the committee? Why did you not approach the Supreme Court immediately? Did you take a chance of a favourable order there first," a division bench headed by Justice Dipankar Datta verbally asked Varma's counsel."Judges have abstained from attending these proceedings in the past," the bench said. Varma's counsel, senior advocate Kapil Sibal , responded saying that this cannot be held against Justice Varma "I (Varma) appeared because I thought the (inquiry) committee would find out who the cash belongs to," Sibal of burnt banknotes had allegedly been recovered from an outhouse of Justice Varma's residence in Delhi after a fire incident in March. Justice Varma, a judge at the Delhi High Court at the time, had claimed ignorance about the cash. Neither has Justice Varma disputed the fire incident nor the recovery of cash, Justice Datta said, adding: "Neither can the fire incident be disbelieved, nor can the recovery of cash." Justice Datta told the counsel that if Varma was challenging the procedure, then he would have to satisfy the court that the procedure adopted was against the development took place during the hearing of a plea filed by Justice Varma challenging the Supreme Court-appointed in-house committee report indicting him over the recovery of the cash. In his plea, Justice Varma has also sought a declaration that the recommendation made by former Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna for his removal as a high court judge be declared unconstitutional and ultra bench on Monday pointed out shortcomings in the plea filed by Justice Varma. "This petition should not have been filed like this. Please see the party is registrar general here and not secretary general. The first party is the supreme court as your grievance is against the process mentioned."The bench also objected to the Union of India being made a respondent. "This petition should not have been filed so casually, maybe it missed your notice also. There are three respondents, your main grievance is against the Supreme Court. Union of India not required. Supreme Court, through the Registrar, confidential, not required. Main is, Respondent No. 2, through whom the Supreme Court is to be represented, Secretary General," Justice Datta bench posted the matter for resumed hearing on Wednesday.
