On a day when the Supreme Court of India sought a progress report on the probe into an Air India plane’s June 2025 crash in Ahmedabad – 260 people were killed – an Italian newspaper came out with new claims citing sources in aviation agencies.
The claims put a pilot at the centre of the crash.
Key claims in new media report on AI-171 crash
Who moved the switch?
The news report said the Indian investigators are preparing to state in their final probe report that Air India Flight 171 crashed because one of the pilots turned off the aircraft’s fuel switches in an act that was “almost certainly” intentional.
These findings would be based on the fact that there’s no technical defect found in the aircraft, meaning a human could have caused crash, Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera reported on Wednesday. It said key evidence included cockpit voice recordings, cleansed of background noise, identifying which pilot moved the fuel switch “from RUN to CUTOFF”.
It’s unclear so far whether the final probe report will explicitly pin responsibility, the name at the centre of it all is the aircraft’s pilot commander, Sumeet Sabharwal, who died in the crash, Corriere della Sera reported.
Indian pilots associations and Sabharwal’s family have criticised what they see as an attempt to pin the blame; and have called for more scrutiny on the aircraft maker, the airline and other factors too.
India’s probe agency Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) and the civil aviation ministry did not respond to HT’s requests for comment on the report.
How ‘evidence’ emerged
Flight 171, a Boeing 787 Dreamliner, crashed on June 12 shortly after takeoff from Ahmedabad airport, killing 241 of the 242 on board and 19 on the ground, as the aircraft plummeted onto a medical students’ hostel just seconds after losing thrust from both engines upon takeoff. The flight was headed to London.
In December 2025, AAIB investigators travelled to Washington, where they re-analysed the aircraft’s black box data at the US National Transportation Safety Board laboratories, focusing particularly on cleaned-up cabin audio recordings, sources told Corriere.
Did pilot make a mistake?
The Italian newspaper said a conclusion pointing to the flight captain is a “desired turning point” for US experts who’ve been confronting their Indian counterparts with evidence, as the Indian team refused to recognise a human role in the tragedy.
The report said audio analysis made clear which pilot took the fatal action.
It also ruled out the possibility of a mistake, the newspaper report added.
An AAIB preliminary report one month after the crash established that the engines shut down almost simultaneously after fuel switches were moved.
The cockpit voice recorder captured one pilot asking “Why did you turn off the engines?” with the other responding “It wasn’t me”, though the report did not identify which pilot said what.
US experts conducting simulator tests of a Boeing 787 never found a scenario in which both engines shut down due to a failure, it added. Human intervention, whether intentional or accidental, is the only reasonable explanation, Corriere reported.
Evaluations based on the flight-data recorder pointed to Sabharwal, who was monitoring, while First Officer Clive Kunder was piloting, the newspaper said. The engines shut down in sequence: first the left engine, where the captain sits, then the right. In the final seconds, the first officer’s control yoke was positioned to regain altitude while the captain’s remained stationary, according to the news report citing probe sources.
Has Indian team’s position changed?
There was already pressure on India from western countries in particular that, if the probe was not carried out with full facts, the security level of all Indian airlines could be re-evaluated, the news report noted.
This risked damaging the image of a country investing heavily in air transport, tourism and trade, it quoted sources as saying.
“Admitting that it was one of the pilots who knocked down the plane is increasingly considered a sustainable sacrifice,” one source told the newspaper.
The final conclusions will undergo a “political” evaluation, the Corriere’s sources said. A final report could adopt a more cautious version to avoid strong national controversies, the outlet reported.
US NTSB spokesman Peter C Knudson referred Corriere to the AAIB. Indian authorities – including the AAIB, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation and the civil aviation ministry – did not respond to the newspaper’s questions, it noted.
SC seeks progress report on AAIB probe
Unrelated to the Italian newspaper’s report but also on Wednesday, the Supreme Court sought to know the progress and procedural protocol of the AAIB in its probe, in three weeks’ time.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant noted the submissions made by the Solicitor General of India, Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, who said that the investigation was at its fag end and sought three weeks to submit a report.
During the hearing, the court cautioned against speculation and premature conclusions on the cause of the crash. “With one stroke of the pen, you cannot say that a particular model of aircraft is defective. These are highly technical and sophisticated issues,” the court observed.
The plea in the SC was filed by Safety Matters Foundation seeking a court-monitored inquiry.
Acknowledging the anxiety of the victims’ families, the court said, “We appreciate the concern of the parents and relatives of the pilots and passengers… This kind of proceeding is not meant for a blame game between different stakeholders.”