Infosys Co-Founder and Others Booked Under SC/ST Act
A case has been registered against Senapathy Kris Gopalakrishnan, co-founder of Infosys, along with former Indian Institute of Science (IISc) Director Balaram and 16 others under the Prevention of Atrocities Against SC/ST Act. The complaint, initiated by Durgappa, a faculty member from the tribal Bovi community, followed directives from the 71st City Civil and Sessions Court. The case was filed at the Sadashiva Nagar police station on January 27, 2025.
Durgappa alleged that he was falsely implicated in a honey trap case in 2014, which subsequently led to his dismissal from his position at the Centre for Sustainable Technology, IISc. He further accused the individuals of subjecting him to caste-based abuse and threats. Among the accused are Govindan Rangarajan, Sridhar Warrier, Sandya Vishwswaraih, Hari K.V.S., Dasappa, P. Balaram, Hemalata Mhishi, Chattopadyaya K., Pradeep D. Sawkar, and Manoharan.
No official responses have been received from Kris Gopalakrishnan or the IISc faculty involved in the matter. Gopalakrishnan, who is also a member of the IISc Board of Trustees, has not issued any statements addressing the allegations.
This case has drawn attention to the broader legal interpretations of the SC/ST Act. It is worth noting that the Supreme Court has previously clarified that not all instances of perceived insult or harassment against individuals from Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes can be categorized as offenses under the Act. Such matters require specific context and evidence of intent.
This incident raises questions about institutional accountability and the safeguards in place for marginalized communities within prestigious organizations. It also highlights the legal recourse available to individuals facing discrimination. The proceedings and outcomes of this case will likely set a precedent for similar instances in the future.
The allegations against prominent figures from the corporate and academic worlds have sparked discussions around the social and legal responsibilities of influential institutions. This case also emphasizes the significance of addressing grievances promptly to ensure justice and uphold inclusivity within workplaces. As investigations progress, further developments are awaited to clarify the matter and determine the course of action for the accused.