Supreme Court Demands Progress Report on Air India Ahmedabad Crash Probe

The Supreme Court has directed the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) to submit a progress report on its probe into the fatal Air India Ahmedabad crash within three weeks. The crash in June 2025 resulted in 260 fatalities. The court cautioned against speculation on the cause, emphasizing the technical nature of the investigation and the international protocols being followed. The matter was heard on a plea seeking a court-monitored inquiry into the disaster.

Key Points: SC Seeks Air India Crash Probe Report in 3 Weeks

  • SC seeks AAIB probe progress report
  • Crash killed 260 people in June 2025
  • Court cautions against premature conclusions
  • Inquiry follows international protocols
3 min read

SC seeks progress report on AAIB probe into Air India Ahmedabad crash in three weeks

Supreme Court directs AAIB to submit progress report on Air India Ahmedabad crash investigation that killed 260 people. Hearing in three weeks.

"This is an international investigation. At this stage, the inquiry is to find the cause of the crash, not to attribute responsibility. - Tushar Mehta"

New Delhi, February 12

The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought a progress report and a report on the procedural protocol followed so far by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau in its probe into the Air India Ahmedabad crash of June 12, 2025, which killed 260 people in three weeks' time.

A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant noted the submissions made by the Solicitor General of India, Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, who said that the investigation was at its fag end and sought three weeks' time to submit a report thereon.

"The Solicitor General submits that a fact-finding inquiry in accordance with international commitments is underway and that examination of the entire inquiry report would take time. He assures this Court that all relevant details of the inquiry undertaken so far, including the procedural protocol followed, shall be placed on record along with a progress report", the Court said. The Bench directed that the reports be filed within three weeks and listed the matter thereafter.

During the hearing, the Court cautioned against speculation and premature conclusions on the cause of the crash.

"With one stroke of the pen, you cannot say that a particular model of aircraft is defective. These are highly technical and sophisticated issues," the Court observed.

The Bench also questioned the implications of grounding the Dreamliner aircraft, asking whether such a step would effectively ground an entire airline and how many airlines across the world operate the model.

The plea was filed by Safety Matters Foundation seeking a court-monitored inquiry into the crash.

Appearing for the petitioners, senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan submitted that the applicable accident investigation manual envisaged a court of inquiry in cases of major accidents involving large-scale loss of life. Advocate Prashant Bhushan argued that the rules themselves mandated adherence to international codes, which contemplated a higher-level inquiry in such cases.

Bhushan also raised concerns over the composition of the AAIB team, stating that "five members of the committee are from the DGCA, which itself is under scrutiny."

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, on the other hand, emphasised that the inquiry was being conducted strictly in line with India's international obligations.

"This is an international investigation. At this stage, the inquiry is to find the cause of the crash, not to attribute responsibility," Mehta submitted.

Acknowledging the anxiety of the victims' families, the Court said, "We appreciate the concern of the parents and relatives of the pilots and passengers. We are also eagerly waiting for the outcome of the inquiry."

However, the Bench made it clear that the proceedings could not be converted into a blame-fixing exercise.

"This kind of proceeding is not meant for a blame game between different stakeholders," the Court said, adding that it would be appropriate to await the outcome of the ongoing probe. The matter will be heard again after three weeks.

- ANI

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priyanka N
The Court's caution against speculation is very important. We've seen how social media trials can ruin reputations. Let the technical experts do their job properly. But Prashant Bhushan raises a valid point - having DGCA officials on the investigation team when DGCA itself is under scrutiny doesn't inspire confidence. 🤔
A
Arjun K
"At its fag end" for how long? This is a classic bureaucratic response. The Solicitor General says it's an international investigation, which is fine, but transparency is key. We need to ensure this isn't another cover-up to protect powerful interests. Hope the SC keeps a close watch.
S
Sarah B
As someone who flies frequently for work, this is terrifying. The Dreamliner question is crucial. If there's a model defect, it needs to be addressed globally. But grounding an entire fleet without conclusive proof could cripple air travel. It's a very delicate balance. My heart goes out to the families.
K
Karthik V
The court is right to say this shouldn't become a blame game. The primary goal must be to find the root cause—was it technical failure, human error, maintenance lapse, or something else? Only then can we prevent such tragedies in the future. Jai Hind.
M
Meera T
Respectfully, the court's concern for the families feels a bit hollow when the process is so slow. Every day of delay is agony for them. While procedure is important, can't we have a dedicated fast-track mechanism for such national tragedies? The system needs more heart.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50