Ola CEO Bhavish Aggarwal in Police Custody After Employee’s Suicide Over Toxic Work Culture

Tragedy at Ola Electric Sparks Legal Crisis

Ola Electric, a pioneer in the Indian electric vehicle market, is a victim of a tragic event that has exposed it to a lot of scrutiny. On September 28, 2025, a 38-year-old engineer known as K Aravind, who worked in the company in the homologation department, committed suicide. The case, that was initially cited as an independent death, has now developed into a severe juridical case of the top leadership of the company, its founder and chief executive officer, Bhavish Aggarwal.

This scenario was revealed when the family of Aravind made a police complaint against the company to Bengaluru police. A huge and unexplained bank transfer was the initial cause of suspicion in the family. The company paid 17.46 lakh to his bank account 2 days after the death of Aravind. The family claims that they inquired the company through the HR department and the responses they got were not clear and satisfactory which made them suspect that the company had something to conceal.

This shroudy deal led to a further search of the home of the employee. In this search, the family found a 28 page handwritten note. This so-called suicide letter of Aravind is the most important evidence of the case. It allegedly explains the factors that caused him to resort to such a drastic measure, and it all falls on the workplace environment at the company.

As per the complaint that was made by the family, senior officials have been mentioned as the ones who have caused him to be in distress. In the note, the employee is alleged to have been heavily mentally harassed and pressured with the work. It further alleges that he was not given his due salary and other allowances, which brought him to the realm of financial and emotional depression. The family has made the authorities shown this note as an evidence.

Police Action and Allegations

When the brother of the Aravind complained and the note of 28 pages was found, the Subramanyapura police in Bengaluru made official charges.  This is not only a lawsuit against unnamed officials but the actual names of the founders and CEO of Ola Electric, Bhavish Aggarwal, and another high-level executive, Subrat Kumar Das, who was in charge of the engineer department are mentioned in the lawsuit.

The case is registered in the Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) which addresses the abetment to suicide. Such legal intervention implies that the police are inquiring whether the purported acts of the executives were direct or in part the motivation that pushed the employee to commit suicide. The decision to open an FIR on the CEO of one of the most valuable startups in India has created ripples in the corporate and technological world.

The claims made in the complaint are awful indications of the working environment. According to the brother of the dead person, the note talked of sustained work-related harassment and frequent humiliation. It is not the first time when the work culture of Ola is criticized. In May 2025, a fellow employee of Krutrim, the artificial intelligence department of Ola, was also found dead of suicide earlier in May, and social media posts suggested it was a result of a toxic work culture and intense pressure.

The brother of Aravind has addressed the media saying that his brother had already discussed the pressure and the toxic culture at the company. But what the family had not known was how much he was suffering. This second death in a few months has heightened the scrutiny of the internal operations of the company and the extreme pressure of the company to achieve high goals in a high-pressure setting on the employees.

Ola’s Response and Legal Challenge

Ola Electric has publicly reacted to the unfortunate accident and the legal proceeding that took place afterwards. A spokesperson of the company said in an official statement that he was deeply saddened by the death of the employee. The company wrote, “We are very much saddened by the unfortunate death of our colleague, Aravind and our thoughts were with his family in this hardship period. The company also verified that Aravind had been working a period of more than three and half years at their Bengaluru headquarters.

In its defense, Ola Electric argues that the employee had never resorted to the formal channel as a way of complaining about his employment. It was mentioned that in his time, Aravind had never raised any complaint or grievance concerning his employment or any form of harassment. Another element raised by the company was that the engineer had no direct day to day contact with the top management of the company, which included the promoter, Bhavish Aggarwal.

With respect to the questionable bank transfer Ola Electric has explained it as a good intention to assist the family. The company asserted that it immediately made the full and final payment to the bank account of the employee to ensure that it extended him instantaneous aid considering that he had a grieving family. The point of this explanation is quite divergent with what the family perceived as the transfer as an attempt to conceal internal evils.

The most significant of all, Ola Electric has acted swiftly, to defend its executives in court. The company appealed against the registration of the FIR at the Karnataka High Court. The court has in turn issued so-called protective orders to Ola Electric and its officials. This order prohibits the police to engage in any “coercive action” against the petitioners that includes arresting them during the investigation process.

Wider Concerns About Work Culture

The case has also provided a new twist to the old issues regarding the work culture at Ola. Reports by former employees have over the years revealed that the company is a toxic and high-pressure environment according to reports as well as investigations by media houses. Such reports usually accuse of a management style that is aggressive, demanding, and imposes unrealistic deadlines that resulted in a high turnover rate and burnout among employees, especially Aggarwal.

This high-pressure environment has been justified by the company and its executives as a compulsory hustle culture. They claim that in order to reach a revolutionary objective, e.g., to create a new industry in the empty land, there should be high-performance and fast-paced environment. This defense is however being highly questioned now in the wake of these tragic events. The work culture of the company has been demanded by employee unions that it be investigated by the government.