Air India flight AI171 crash (Picture credit: PTI)
MUMBAI: The investigation into the fatal crash of Air India Flight AI171 by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) is facing legal challenges. A second case, this time a writ petition, has been filed before the Supreme Court of India demanding an independent, judicially monitored inquiry into the loss of the Boeing 787-8 (VT-ANB) on June 12, 2025, in Ahmedabad, which claimed 260 lives.The petition was filed by Pushkaraj Sabharwal, father of the deceased pilot Capt Sumeet Sabharwal, and the Federation of Indian Pilots. It directly challenges the preliminary report issued by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), which attributed the crash to “pilot action.” The petitioners allege the AAIB report is technically flawed, incomplete, and biased.A month ago, a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed in the Supreme Court by the NGO Safety Matters Foundation seeking full disclosure of flight data, cockpit voice transcripts, and technical records related to the Air India Boeing 787 Dreamliner accident. The PIL sought the appointment of independent professionals to monitor the investigation. It alleged that the preliminary report released by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau a month after the accident was “selective”. The incomplete disclosure of critical information, coupled with the premature attribution of pilot error while overlooking systemic faults is a violation of the articles of the Indian Constitution and international law governing accident investigations. The writ filed by the Capt’s father alleges technical flaws and system failure played a role in the accident. The petition focuses on several critical technical inconsistencies that suggest a catastrophic system failure occurred before any crew input, such as premature RAT Deployment, for instance. The Ram Air Turbine (RAT) deployed during take-off, an event which typically indicates a major electrical or digital power failure, predating any alleged pilot error. Another point was about a possible total systems collapse. The simultaneous failure of all power and data systems, including the Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT), points to a single-point electrical collapse, it said. As for the fuel control switches, the AAIB report’s finding of both fuel control switches moving from RUN to CUTOFF within one second is called physically improbable under take-off conditions, it said. The petition suggests these points to an automatic or corrupted FADEC (Full Authority Digital Engine Control) command. The writ petition stated that the AAIB allegedly failed to investigate a known risk in the Boeing 787’s Common Core System (CCS)—the unified software that links all avionics, flight controls, FADEC, and electrical power. This is a crucial line of inquiry for potential cascading or common-mode failures. The petition cites anomalies in forensic evidence, including thermal damage to the Enhanced Flight Recorder without soot deposits. This suggests battery-induced combustion, not an external fuel fire, as the cause of damage.Beyond the technical arguments, the petitioners assert that the AAIB’s investigation violates international standards for independence. Conflict of interest was brought to focus, the petition argued the investigation breaches the legal doctrine of nemo judex in causa sua (“no one should be a judge in their own cause”). It highlights that DGCA officials and representatives of the manufacturers (Boeing and GE) are part of the probe, compromising its objectivity. This arrangement allegedly violates ICAO Annex 13 principles for an independent investigation.Addressing the media reports in certain foreign publications that appeared before the preliminary report was made public, the petition accused the AAIB of unlawfully leaking confidential cockpit voice data (CVR) in violation of the Aircraft Investigation Rules, 2017 (Rule 17(5)). The selective leaks, the petition said, had fueled a prejudiced media narrative against the deceased flight crew. The petition ultimately prays for the constitution of a Judicially Monitored Committee, to be headed by a retired Supreme Court Judge, with the inclusion of independent aviation and systems experts. This move aims to ensure a transparent, technically sound, and unbiased inquiry consistent with global safety standards. Go to Source