Top News

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has granted the Central Government a three-week period to submit the current status of the investigation into the tragic Ahmedabad air crash that resulted in the loss of 260 lives.

A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was addressing petitions, including one from the father of Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, the pilot of Air India flight AI-171, which crashed on June 12, 2025. He is requesting an independent investigation overseen by the court.

During the proceedings, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre and the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), informed the court that the inquiry conducted by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) is nearing completion.

Mehta stated, "We are at the final stages of the inquiry, and the report will be prepared soon," adding that some aircraft components have been sent abroad for specialized testing.

Given the involvement of victims from various nationalities, he noted that international protocols are being adhered to during the investigation.

Acknowledging this information, the bench allowed three weeks for the Centre to finalize the report, which must be submitted in a sealed envelope along with an affidavit outlining the procedural protocols followed thus far.

The court requested, "What procedural protocol has been followed? Please inform us in three weeks," and also asked for a progress report to be presented at the next hearing.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the NGO Safety Matters Foundation, raised concerns that pilot associations have highlighted safety issues with the Boeing 787 aircraft, urging that these planes be grounded until a thorough inspection is conducted.

He argued, "The entire pilots’ association is indicating a problem with the Boeing 787 that necessitates grounding," noting that neither the government nor the AAIB has responded to these concerns.

Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing Captain Sabharwal’s father, reiterated the call for a court-monitored investigation, alleging that in past aircraft crash cases, initial blame was placed on pilots, only for later investigations to uncover technical faults.

He referenced previous Boeing 737 incidents where pilots were initially blamed, but subsequent findings by US regulators revealed aircraft defects, asserting that critical documents in those cases were not disclosed promptly.

The bench, acknowledging the unfortunate nature of the incident, cautioned against making broad statements about any specific aircraft model or airline without definitive evidence.

The court remarked, "We must exercise caution when making statements about any particular brand of aircraft. Dreamliners were once regarded as the best."

In response to recent media reports regarding a supposed fuel switch issue in another Dreamliner flight, the bench noted that initial claims were later clarified by official sources. "Last week, it was reported that a Dreamliner from London to Delhi had a fuel switch problem. However, it was later confirmed by officials that everything was functioning properly. This incident, of course, is very unfortunate. We should be conservative in our comments regarding any specific airline," it stated.