Last Updated:
SC said the central purpose of AAIB inquiry is to determine the technical cause of the accident and issue corrective recommendations.
On June 12, the London Gatwick-bound Boeing 787-8 aircraft crashed soon after taking off from the Ahmedabad airport. (PTI)
The Supreme Court on Thursday underscored that the Air India Dreamliner pilots cannot be held responsible for the 12 June crash, as the Centre clarified that the ongoing AAIB investigation aims only to identify the cause of the tragedy and not to blame the cockpit crew or any individual.
Over 250 people, including crew members and bystanders on the ground, were killed in the tragic accident.
Appearing before a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta stressed that the probe was being carried out strictly in compliance with international civil aviation standards. He added that the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) framework lays down mandatory steps for all air crash investigations.
Mehta said the Ministry of Civil Aviation had also issued a clarification after the preliminary AAIB report to dispel misconceptions that blame had been attributed to the pilots or any other party. “There is no attempt to apportion blame. These investigations involve representatives from countries whose nationals are victims,” he said.
What did SC say?
The Supreme Court echoed this position, noting that the central purpose of an AAIB inquiry is to determine the technical cause of the accident and issue corrective recommendations to ensure such incidents do not recur. “The object is not to apportion blame,” the bench remarked while seeking a detailed response from the Centre.
The notice was issued on a petition filed by the father of Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, one of the pilots who died in the crash. His counsel, senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, argued that the investigation had failed to fully follow ICAO standards, raising concerns about the integrity of the process.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for NGO Safety Matters Foundation, contended that an independent court of inquiry was necessary given reported “systemic failures” in Boeing 787 aircraft globally. He warned that continuing operations without a comprehensive probe risked passenger safety.
The solicitor general, however, urged the court to let the investigation proceed without external interference, cautioning against creating unnecessary public alarm.
Questions over preliminary findings
The petitioners have challenged early AAIB observations hinting at possible “human error”, saying such conclusions were premature when electrical or software failures had not been conclusively ruled out. They argue that any suggestion of pilot error, without definitive evidence, unfairly tarnishes the deceased crew.
The preliminary AAIB report noted unexpected movement of both engine fuel control switches to CUTOFF shortly after take-off, prompting loss of thrust and triggering the Ram Air Turbine. A Mayday call was recorded seconds before the crash.
Previous hearings saw the Supreme Court remark that no government report had blamed the pilots. It also criticised selective public disclosure of the preliminary report, observing that grieving families should not face further stigma.
The case will be taken up after the Centre files its detailed affidavit, as the court continues to underline the need for a fair, expert-driven and transparent investigation into one of India’s worst aviation disasters.
Shuddhanta Patra, a seasoned journalist with eight years of experience, serves as Senior Sub‑Editor at CNN News 18. With expertise across national politics, geopolitics, business news, she has influenced public…Read More
Shuddhanta Patra, a seasoned journalist with eight years of experience, serves as Senior Sub‑Editor at CNN News 18. With expertise across national politics, geopolitics, business news, she has influenced public… Read More
Delhi, India, India
November 14, 2025, 08:12 IST
Read More
Source link
[ad_3]