Air India Plane Crash: Pilot Error Not Conclusive, Supreme Court Calls AAIB Report 'Irresponsible'

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday, September 22 refused to direct the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) to release the entire investigation record in connection with the Ahmedabad Air India plane crash. The Bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh, however criticised the“piecemeal and selective” manner in which AAIB shared its preliminary findings suggesting pilot error. It said that such a move before the probe was completed was“irresponsible” and risked creating a distorted public perception. The court was hearing a petition from Safety Matters Foundation, an NGO led by former pilot Amit Singh, seeking a court-monitored independent investigation into the crash. The plea contended that the preliminary report violated the Aircraft (Investigation of Accidents and Incidents) Rules, 2017, which require comprehensive disclosure of factual data gathered early in an investigation. 

“The selective release of excerpts from the preliminary report was unfortunate. Such reports must remain confidential until the inquiry is concluded,” the Bench remarked, adding that tragedies of this magnitude should not be used for commercial or competitive gains by rival airlines. Notices were issued to the Union government and the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), with the Bench emphasising the need for a fair, impartial, and speedy probe by qualified experts. The AAIB's preliminary findings stated that fuel control switches moved to the“CUTOFF” position just three seconds after take-off, shutting down both engines. The cockpit voice recorder captured one pilot asking,“why did he cut off?”, with the other denying any such action. The report did not clarify whether this was intentional or accidental but identified it as the immediate trigger for the crash.

Conflict of Interest

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the NGO, raised concerns over the probe team's composition, pointing out that three of its five members were serving DGCA officers-creating a conflict of interest since the DGCA's own role could come under scrutiny. Justice Kant, however, observed that the mere presence of serving officers did not automatically imply bias or protection for individuals at fault. The petition further alleged that crucial evidence, including the complete Digital Flight Data Recorder (DFDR) readout, full Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) transcripts with timestamps, and Electronic Aircraft Fault Recording (EAFR) data-was being withheld. Instead, the report relied on paraphrased references to cockpit conversations without corroborative detail, thereby shaping a narrative that leaned towards pilot error while diverting attention from possible technical or systemic failures.

Plea Cites Civil Aviation Safety

The NGO argued that the case was not only about one crash but also about safeguarding public trust in civil aviation.“Passengers board flights believing the State will ensure transparency and accountability. A selective or compromised probe erodes that faith and risks future lives,” the petition stated. The June 12 tragedy involved Air India's Boeing 787-8 (Flight AI171) bound for London Gatwick, which crashed into a medical hostel complex shortly after departure from Ahmedabad. A total of 265 people died-241 passengers, 12 crew members, and 19 individuals on the ground. Victims included 169 Indians, 52 British nationals, seven Portuguese citizens, one Canadian, and 12 crew. The sole survivor was Vishwashkumar Ramesh, a passenger from Britain.

MENAFN22092025007385015968ID1110093050