Air India Crash: SC Seeks Centre, DGCA's response on Plea seeking Independent Probe Into Ahmedabad Tragedy
Supreme Court issued notice for an independent, expert-led probe into Air India Flight AI171 crash, ensuring impartiality after preliminary report suggested pilot error and data was withheld
The ill-fated Dreamliner, operating as Air India Flight AI171 from Ahmedabad to London Gatwick, crashed shortly after takeoff on June 12, 2025, killing 229 passengers, 12 crew members, and 19 individuals on the ground
The Supreme Court on Monday commenced hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the Safety Matters Foundation, seeking an independent and court-monitored investigation into the crash of Air India Flight AI171 that killed 260 people on June 12, 2025.
The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice N.K. Singh heard arguments raising concerns over the impartiality and transparency of the probe conducted by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB).
The petitioner’s counsel, Advocate Prashant Bhushan, argued that over 100 days after the crash, the AAIB had only released a preliminary report, attributing the incident to pilot error due to fuel cutoff switches being moved from RUN to CUTOFF.
Bhushan emphasized that critical data, including the full Digital Flight Data Recorder (DFDR), Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) transcripts with timestamps, and Electronic Aircraft Fault Recording (EAFR) data, have been withheld, limiting any meaningful analysis of the crash.
Bhushan also raised concerns about conflicts of interest, noting that three of the five members of the investigating team are serving DGCA officials, whose organization’s role may come under scrutiny in the inquiry. He called for a fully independent investigation by an expert body, supervised by the Court to ensure fairness and transparency.
Justice Kant noted the need for confidentiality and cautioned against premature public disclosure of flight data that could misrepresent facts or unfairly blame pilots. He remarked on the dangers of piecemeal leaks creating speculation, saying, “Instead of piecemeal leaking of information, somebody should maintain confidentiality till regular inquiry is taken to logical conclusion.”
Bhushan countered that independent experts need access to the complete flight data to assess all technical aspects of the crash and pointed out that preliminary reports had already generated misleading media narratives suggesting pilot negligence or mental instability.
Justice Kant acknowledged the problem, calling such media reporting “very unfortunate” and highlighting the importance of a fair inquiry.
The Court issued notice to the respondents, directing that the investigation must be free, impartial, independent, and expedited by a suitably expert team. The Bench emphasized that the inquiry should be completed promptly, ensuring accurate conclusions while preventing speculation and misinformation.
The hearing marks a critical step in addressing questions of accountability, technical scrutiny, and transparency following one of India’s deadliest aviation accidents, which has raised significant public and media attention.
The petition, filed by Safety Matters Foundation, a non-governmental organization dedicated to promoting aviation safety, raises grave concerns over the selective and incomplete disclosures made by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) in its preliminary report.
The petition filed through AoR Pranav Sachdeva argues that the report prematurely attributes the accident to alleged pilot error while overlooking documented systemic and technical anomalies, thereby undermining transparency, accountability, and aviation safety.
The ill-fated Dreamliner, operating as Air India Flight AI171 from Ahmedabad to London Gatwick, crashed shortly after takeoff on June 12, 2025, killing 229 passengers, 12 crew members, and 19 individuals on the ground. The aircraft, manufactured in 2013 and powered by GEnx-1B70 engines, had a valid Airworthiness Review Certificate at the time of the accident.
While the AAIB released its preliminary report on July 12, 2025, attributing the crash to the sudden transition of both fuel cutoff switches from RUN to CUTOFF, the petitioner claims the report is riddled with gaps. Sensitive technical information had already appeared in the Wall Street Journal before the report’s release, raising fears of selective leaks and compromised integrity.
The petition highlights several deficiencies in the AAIB’s preliminary report, including:
1. Selective disclosure of cockpit voice recordings – The report paraphrased extracts without publishing full transcripts or timestamps, creating an impression biased towards pilot error.
2. Failure to address known technical vulnerabilities – Despite a U.S. FAA advisory (SAIB No. NM-18-33) warning of potential disengagement in the Boeing 787’s fuel control switch locking mechanism, Air India had not conducted inspections, and the report failed to scrutinize this lapse.
3. Ignoring electrical anomalies – Data showed Bus Power Control Unit faults and deployment of the Ram Air Turbine (RAT), indicating severe electrical instability, yet these findings were sidelined.
4. Overlooking automatic relight attempts – The engines attempted multiple relights, suggesting transient faults rather than deliberate human action, but the report dismissed these findings.
5. Unexplained destruction of an Enhanced Aircraft Flight Recorder (EAFR) – One of the two recorders sustained unusual thermal damage, raising questions the report did not address.
6. Suppression of survivor testimony – The sole surviving passenger described flickering cabin lights and electrical failures moments before the crash, contradicting the pilot error narrative, but his statement was omitted.
The petitioner further alleges a conflict of interest in the investigating team, as three of the five members are serving officers of the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA). Since the DGCA is directly responsible for certifying the aircraft and monitoring Air India’s operations, its officials’ presence compromises the independence of the inquiry.
The petition stresses that under Annex 13 of the Chicago Convention, to which India is a signatory, investigations must be independent, impartial, and aimed solely at preventing future accidents; not at apportioning blame. By failing to meet these standards, India risks undermining global trust in its aviation safety regime.
The Safety Matters Foundation seeks directions from the Supreme Court to:
-Make publicly available the complete data retrieved from both black boxes.
-Appoint independent experts to oversee the ongoing investigation.
-Ensure compliance with international obligations under Annex 13 of the Chicago Convention.
Case Title: Safety Matters Foundation v. Union of India
Hearing Date: September 22, 2025
Bench: Justice Surya Kant and Justice NK Singh