Pilot-in-command not to be blamed for Air India crash, observes SC

The Supreme Court observed that no fault could be attributed to the Air India pilot in the June Ahmedabad crash as it heard a plea for an independent, court-monitored probe into the tragedy

The Supreme Court on Friday observed that no fault could be attributed to the pilot-in-command of Air India’s Boeing 787 Dreamliner that crashed in Ahmedabad in June this year. As many as 260 people, including the two pilots and

all crew members, had died in that crash. 

A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi made this observation while hearing a plea filed by Pushkar Raj Sabharwal, father of Commander Sumeet Sabharwal, the pilot-in-command of the ill-fated flight. The petitioner has sought an independent, court-monitored probe into the accident, alleging bias in the ongoing investigation by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB). 

Appearing for the petitioner, Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan argued that the existing investigation lacked independence and failed to inspire public confidence. He urged the SC to direct a judicially supervised investi­gation under Rule 12 of the Aircraft (Investigation of Accidents and Incidents) Rules, which calls for impartiality in such inquiries. 

Taking note of the submissions, the Bench issued notices to the Centre, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) and the AAIB, and said the matter would be heard along with a connected petition on November 10. 

During the proceedings, Justice Surya Kant reassured the petitioner that no blame could be laid on his late son.  “It is an extremely unfortunate incident, but you should not bear the burden that your son is being blamed. Nobody can blame him for anything,” the judge said.

 

Justice Bagchi added that the AAIB’s preliminary findings did not point to any fault on the part of the pilots.

 

Sankaranarayanan also referred to global safety concerns involving Boeing aircraft, urging that the Ahmedabad crash be examined in that broader context. Justice Bagchi, however, noted that questioning the investigation’s integrity would require challenging the statutory framework itself. 

The petitioner further drew attention to a Wall Street Journal report suggesting pilot error, based on unnamed official sources. The Bench dismissed the significance of such reports. 

“We are not concerned with what foreign media says. That is nasty reporting. No one here believes it was the pilot’s fault,” the Bench remarked. 

Sabharwal and the Federation of Indian Pilots have sought that the ongoing AAIB inquiry be replaced with an independent panel of aviation experts chaired by a retired Supreme Court judge. The plea contends that the current investigating team includes officials whose conduct is under scrutiny, and that the preliminary report was one-sided, hinting at pilot error while overlooking systemic and technical aspects. 

In September, the apex court had already voiced concern over the selective leaking of the AAIB’s preliminary report, cautioning that partial disclosures risk distorting public perception before the investigation is complete.