|
The Supreme Court on Monday took a dim view of the various baseless theories being floated in the media over what went wrong with the Gatwick-bound Air India flight that crashed near the Ahmedabad airport on June 12, killing 260 people.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh termed such misrepresentation of the tragic accident as an "unfortunate and irresponsible kind of behaviour" and expressed concern over the premature conclusions being drawn in the public domain. The Court was hearing a plea filed by Safety Matters Foundation, an NGO focused on aviation safety, which has sought a transparent, fair, independent, and expeditious inquiry into the crash. Appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Advocate Prashant Bhushan flagged serious concerns over the inadequacy of the preliminary investigation conducted so far. Bhushan argued that more than 100 days after the crash, the public remains in the dark about what went wrong, putting passengers of similar aircraft models at risk. He expressed particular concern about the composition of the current five-member investigation team--three of whom are from the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), the very body whose own role in ensuring airworthiness may come under scrutiny. He questioned the credibility of such an internal investigation and cited Rule 12, which allows for a judicial inquiry in the event of such accidents. "How can officers investigate their own possible negligence?" he asked. The bench acknowledged the call for transparency but cautioned against selective leaks or premature public disclosure of technical details, asking, "Why are they asking so many things to come in public domain?" The Court noted that confidentiality must be preserved until the investigation is complete to avoid misinformation and misinterpretation. Bhushan, however, stressed that there was "no object of privacy" here, since the identities of the pilots, passengers, and staff are already publicly known. He said that the absence of a comprehensive report was fuelling speculation. Referring to an independent podcast titled Airline Matters, Bhushan said that several aviation professionals had pointed to a possible electrical system failure as the cause of the crash. He also raised concern about a line in the report where one pilot allegedly asked the other, "Why did you cut off fuel?" and the other responded, "I didn't." Bhushan argued that this ambiguous sentence was being interpreted in the media as pilot error, unfairly shifting blame without technical backing. Considering the submissions, the Court opined that maintaining confidentiality during the investigation is essential, but also clarified that the conclusions must eventually be brought into the public domain. The Court has issued notice to the Union Ministry of Civil Aviation and the DGCA, to the limited extent of the plea seeking to ensure that an independent, fair and expeditious probe into the crash. The matter will next be heard after the government files its response. (ANI)
|
