Supreme Court Criticises Irresponsible Reports on Air India Crash

The Supreme Court on Monday expressed strong disapproval of media reports suggesting that pilots may have deliberately shut off the fuel supply in connection with the June 12 Air India crash in Ahmedabad. Justice Surya Kant described such claims as “very unfortunate and irresponsible,” stressing the need for caution in attributing blame before the completion of a formal inquiry.

The remarks came during the hearing of a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a court-monitored, independent probe into the tragedy, which claimed 260 lives, including 19 people on the ground. Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioners, drew the Court’s attention to a Wall Street Journal report that cited unnamed sources alleging pilot error before the official investigation report had even been submitted. He argued that such narratives risk unfairly maligning experienced pilots who are no longer alive to defend themselves.

Bhushan further called for transparency in the investigation, urging that independent experts be granted access to the flight data recorder. He highlighted a potential conflict of interest, noting that three members of the probe committee are serving officials of the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) — the very body whose oversight of safety protocols is also under question.

“More than 100 days have passed since the crash, yet only a preliminary report has been released,” Bhushan submitted. “Till today, there is no clarity on what happened. All passengers traveling on Boeing 787s remain at risk.” He contended that families of victims, as well as aviation professionals, are troubled by the suggestion of pilot error in preliminary findings and concerned about possible attempts to downplay aircraft issues flagged in the report.

The bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and N.K. Singh, acknowledged the importance of a fair and impartial inquiry but cautioned against premature disclosures. Justice Kant observed:
“To the extent of ensuring a fair and impartial inquiry, it is important. But why are you asking for so many details to enter the public domain? If the data records are made public, people will sit in their podcast rooms and spin theories. If tomorrow someone irresponsibly says a pilot is at fault, the family will suffer — and if later the report clears them, then what happens?”

Bhushan countered that confidentiality in this matter was unnecessary since all crew members had perished, and insisted that the public interest required full disclosure. He argued that transparency was vital, especially as the preliminary report itself indicated technical issues with the aircraft that had not been adequately addressed by the DGCA.

The Supreme Court has now issued notice to the Ministry of Civil Aviation and the DGCA, seeking their response to the PIL.