The Supreme Court has dismissed a petition seeking further details on the Air India plane crash investigation, raising questions about the petitioner's underlying motives and agenda.
Key Points
- The Supreme Court dismissed a plea concerning the Air India plane crash preliminary investigation report, questioning the petitioner's motives.
- The petitioner sought additional information in the report, including the sequence of events leading to the crash.
- The Delhi high court previously rejected the PIL, suggesting the petitioner use the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
- The Supreme Court bench expressed concern over the petitioner's 'deep-rooted agenda' in filing the plea.
The Supreme Court dismissed a petitioner's plea related to the preliminary investigation report on the Air India plane crash in Ahmedabad last June, questioning the motives behind the filing.
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi also refused to accept the petitioner's contention that authorities be directed to treat his plea as a representation.
The petitioner had challenged a February 25 order of the Delhi high court that rejected a PIL seeking that information on the 'complete sequence of events' leading to the crash be included in the preliminary investigation report.
"What is your deep-rooted agenda? As if we don't understand the motive. The people who lost their lives, their family members are not filing (petitions) but you are filing," an anguished CJI told the counsel appearing for the petitioner.
What the plea sought
On June 12 last year, Air India flight AI 171, a Boeing 787-8 aircraft en route to London Gatwick, crashed into a medical college hostel complex shortly after take off from Ahmedabad's Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport. The aircraft burst into flames, killing 241 out of 242 people onboard and 19 people on the ground
The petitioner had urged the high court to 'read down' the preliminary investigation report of the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau and direct the authorities to modify the report to include the time-chart of 'flame out' of engines and transition of fuel switches, whether mechanical or manual.
The high court said the PIL, which had also sought a direction to the bureau to publish such information in public domain, was 'highly misconceived'.
Observing that the petitioner should have taken recourse available to him under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the high court said, "Such prayer in our considered opinion cannot be granted."
If such information is worthy of being given under the RTI Act, it would be provided, the high court said.
© 2026