Air India Crash: Supreme Court Urges Restraint on Aircraft Brand Commentary, Seeks Union Report

Date:

The Supreme Court has directed the Union of India to file, within three weeks, a detailed report explaining the procedural protocol followed to investigate the Air India plane crash that claimed 260 lives.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued the direction while hearing SAFETY MATTERS FOUNDATION v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS., Diary No. 53715/2025 (along with connected cases).

Court Emphasises Responsible Public Discourse

Chief Justice Surya Kant described the crash as a profound national tragedy. He expressed deep sympathy for the families of the victims, including the father of pilot Sumeet Sabharwal. The CJI acknowledged the emotional devastation caused by the loss.

At the same time, the Court urged restraint in public commentary. The CJI cautioned parties against making adverse remarks about any specific aircraft model. He noted that the Boeing 787 Dreamliner was once regarded as one of the safest aircraft globally. He advised counsel not to rely on unverified media reports alleging technical defects.

The Chief Justice referred to recent media coverage of a Boeing 787 flight from London to Bangalore that allegedly experienced a switch malfunction. He pointed out that the airline later clarified that the switch functioned properly. He also mentioned that he had travelled on a Dreamliner from Paris to Delhi shortly before the hearing.

Submissions Before the Bench

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan appeared for the pilots’ federation and for the father of pilot Sumeet Sabharwal. Advocate Prashant Bhushan also made submissions. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta represented the Union of India.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan argued that government rules require a Court of Inquiry in accidents of such magnitude. He questioned the composition of the ongoing Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) probe. According to him, five members of the AAIB team belong to the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), whose actions are under scrutiny.

Bhushan further submitted that three other Boeing 787 aircraft reportedly faced similar technical issues after the crash. The CJI responded that the Court should not rely on media narratives.

Bhushan also claimed that nearly 8,000 pilots had written to the government stating that Boeing 787 aircraft were unsafe and should be grounded. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the Court that no such material had been placed on record.

In a lighter moment, the CJI remarked that the Court might “strongly recommend” travelling by different airlines.

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan cited two Boeing 737 crash cases where authorities initially blamed pilots. He stated that the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) later identified aircraft defects. He alleged that key documents remained undisclosed and that the matters eventually settled for substantial sums. He also listed previous air crash cases in India where the Supreme Court directed Courts of Inquiry headed by former judges.

Inquiry to Focus on Cause, Not Blame

During the hearing, counsel raised concerns about notices reportedly issued to the nephew and niece of pilot Sumeet Sabharwal, both pilots themselves. The Chief Justice disapproved of discussing such personal details in open court.

Solicitor General Mehta informed the Bench that the AAIB investigation was nearing completion and sought additional time. The Court re-listed the matter.

Justice Joymalya Bagchi clarified that the inquiry aims to determine the cause of the accident, not to assign responsibility. Chief Justice Kant stated that the Court would consider whether a formal Court of Inquiry is necessary after reviewing the AAIB findings.

Earlier Observations

In September 2025, the Supreme Court criticised the selective leak of the AAIB’s preliminary report. The Court described the piecemeal disclosure as “unfortunate” and stressed the need to maintain confidentiality until the investigation concludes.

In November 2025, the Court orally observed that no blame could be attributed to pilot Sumeet Sabharwal.

The matter remains pending.

spot_img

Share post:

Popular

More like this
Related

Supreme Court Acquits Former Clerk in Bribery Case

The Supreme Court has stressed that Bribery Demand Proof...

Supreme Court Examines Shiv Sena Symbol Dispute

The Supreme Court has raised a key question in...

Supreme Court Upholds Excess Pay Recovery From NIT Calicut Teachers

The Supreme Court has upheld the Recovery of Excess...

Higher Marks Cannot Cure Lack of Essential Qualification: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that an Essential Recruitment...