Delhi HC dismisses plea over report disclosure on Ahmedabad plane crash

THe new delhi heights margaret court on wed dismissed a petition seeking to say down Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB)’s preliminary report prepared into the crash of Air India Flight 171, which claimed 260 lives in June last year, on the ground that the same failed to provide complete sequence of events including the exact time of flame-out of each engine and timing of transition of the switches from “RUN” to “CUT OFF”.The petitioner, Suresh Chand Shrivastava, a mechanical engineer from IIT Delhi, contended that he was entitled to full disclosure of the relevant details, asserting that there was a high probability that both engines had failed due to SURGE. This, according to him, could be verified only by examining the precise timings. He thus sought a reading down of the AAIB’s July 12, 2025, preliminary report and directions to the AAIB to modify the same by including the details.A bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia observed that the reliefs sought by Shrivastava were “highly misconceived,” noting that the doctrine of reading down is applied only to interpret statutory provisions. The Court held that seeking to read down an expert report was legally impermissible.The bench further remarked that the report in question had been prepared by specialists, and even if it contained any deficiencies, the Court could not grant the assistance sought on that basis.Also Read: ‘No final conclusions in AI 171 crash probe’: AAIB rebuts Italian media report“We are afraid, such a prayer is highly misconceived for 2 reasons. The doctrine of reading down is applied by superior courts while interpreting the provisions of statutes and therefore asking the court to read down a preliminary report which has been prepared by the experts in our opinion is a prayer which is legally impermissible to be granted by the court,” the court said in its order.The bench added, “Secondly, it is a well settled principle of law that the field where the experts operate should ordinarily be left to the experts for the simple reason that courts are not experts in the areas. The report which has sought to be read down has been prepared by the experts and therefore even if in the assessment of the petitioner, the said report bears some lacuna, no assistance can be put in by filing a writ for reading down such a report.”In his petition, Shrivastava also sought a direction to the AAIB’s Director General to disclose publicly the precise timing of the fuel cut-off and the flame-out of each engine. However, the court declined to grant such relief, observing that the appropriate remedy for obtaining this information was to file an application under the provisions of the Right to Information Act.“The information as sought, is in relation to the preliminary inquiry report and for the said purpose, petitioner could have approached the authority concerned by taking appropriate recourse to the provisions of the right to information act and if such an information was worthy of being given, the same could have been provided to the petitioner or brought to the public domain. The remedy of writ petition thus cannot be permitted to be put to service for such prayer,” the court said in the order.On June 12, Air India Flight AI-171 carrying 230 passengers and 12 crew members crashed shortly after take-off from Ahmedabad airport, killing 229 passengers, all crew members, and 19 people on the ground.The AAIB led the inquiry into the tragedy, with participation from the US National Transportation Safety Board, the UK’s Air Accidents Investigation Branch, and Boeing representatives.On July 12, the preliminary report revealed that both engine fuel control switches moved from RUN to CUTOFF seconds after takeoff, resulting in a loss of thrust.The cockpit voice recorder captured one pilot questioning the fuel cutoff, with the other denying responsibility. The Ram Air Turbine, a backup power system, deployed automatically, and although one engine began to recover after the switches were returned to RUN, the aircraft could not regain altitude.Even as the high court dismissed the petition, the Supreme Court earlier this month asked the Union government and the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) to place on record the “procedural protocol” being followed in the AAIB’s ongoing investigation. Terming the tragedy “very unfortunate”, a bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said that the court would like to examine the procedure adopted and the nature of the inquiry set up to determine the cause of the crash.