'Very Unfortunate': SC On Pilot's Fuel Cut-Off Mention In Ahmedabad Air India Crash Report
The Supreme Court also issued notices to the Centre and the Director General of Civil Aviation on a plea seeking an independent, fair, and expeditious probe.
The Supreme Court on Monday said that the pilot's fuel cut-off mention in the Ahmedabad Air India crash report is "very unfortunate". The remark was made by the top court while responding to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) for a court-monitored and independent probe into the crash in Ahmedabad.
The Supreme Court also called for official responses from the Centre and the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), following concerns raised about the "pilot error" explanation in the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) preliminary report.
"If tomorrow someone irresponsibly says pilot A or B was at fault, the family will suffer... What happens if the final inquiry report later finds no fault?" the top court asked on Monday.
The court also sought a reply from the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), which in July released a preliminary report on the tragic incident that claimed 265 lives.
The preliminary report spotlighted a conversation between Captain Sumeet Sabharwal and First Officer Clive Kundar, where cockpit audio captured one pilot asking, "Why did you cut off?" and the other responding, "I didn't." This exchange sparked wide speculation that pilot error was the cause behind the horrifying crash.
However, the Aviation safety NGO, Safety Matters Foundation, has challenged this explanation through a Public Interest Litigation (PIL). The group accuses the preliminary report of withholding crucial information and violating fundamental right, specifically, the rights to life, equality, and access to accurate information. The PIL also criticised the report for stressing over systemic issues like fuel-switch defects and electrical faults, while hastily pointing fingers at pilot error.
"It doesn't say what may have happened and what precautions should be taken. The result is that all passengers who are travelling on these Boeing planes are at risk today," Senior Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the petitioner, said.
He also underlined a major conflict of interest, pointing out that the five-member investigation team includes three active members from the DGCA, which itself is under scrutiny. "How can employees of the same organisation that is under question carry out the probe?" he questioned.
Bhushan further highlighted concerns about premature leaks contaminating the public discourse. "Prior to the report being given to the government, The Wall Street Journal published an article that we have come to know from our source that this report is going to blame pilots... some leakage happened. Everybody went on, and said this was a pilot error... They were very experienced pilots. The story that was being given was that the pilots deliberately shut off fuel supply to the engines," he said.
The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh, acknowledged the petitioner's call for a transparent inquiry but warned that full public disclosure might hamper the investigation.
Justice Kant called such comments "very unfortunate and irresponsible" and underscored the need for confidentiality during such sensitive investigations.
The deadly crash of Air India Flight 171 happened just seconds after takeoff from Ahmedabad on June 12. The flight was headed to London Gatwick, carrying 12 crew members and 230 passengers. Tragically, 229 passengers and all crew members lost their lives. The aircraft crashed into a medical college hostel in Ahmedabad, claiming the lives of 19 more. Only one passenger survived the disaster.
(With inputs from news agency PTI)
Top Headlines
