Air India AI 171 Crash Probe: Why Pilots’ Body Is Challenging AAIB’s Investigation

The Federation of Indian Pilots (FIP) has objected to the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau’s (AAIB) summoning of Captain Varun Anand, nephew of the late Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, in the ongoing investigation into the Air India (AI) 171 crash that occurred at Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport (AMD), Ahmedabad on June 12, 2025, The Financial Express reported. The legal notice served by the pilots’ grouping has intensified scrutiny of the probe into one of India’s deadliest civil aviation disasters and sparked debate about the limits of investigative authority.

The summoning of Captain Anand, a serving Air India (AI) pilot, has been described by FIP as both “wholly unwarranted” and procedurally inappropriate, raising concerns that the investigation may be shifting focus toward assigning blame to the flight crew rather than maintaining a technical, fact‑based examination of the crash.

FIP’s Objection to Summons

The Federation of Indian Pilots served a detailed legal notice to AAIB objecting to the bureau’s decision to summon Captain Anand. According to the FIP, Anand has no factual, technical, or expert connection to the crash, and his inclusion is not supported by relevant investigation rules.

According to the pilots’ body, the sole basis for calling Captain Anand appears to be his familial relationship with the deceased captain — a factor which the FIP argues as undermining the integrity of the investigation. As quoted in the exclusive piece in The New Indian Express, the FIP said:

“This gives rise to a serious apprehension that the investigation is proceeding on a preconceived narrative seeking to portray or attribute responsibility to the deceased flight crew rather than objectively examine systemic, mechanical or operational charges……. (summoning Captain Anand) is wholly unwarranted and amounts to harassment and distress in the aftermath of a tragic loss and exposes our client to professional and reputational prejudice.”

The Federation of Indian Pilots (FIP) said the summoning of the nephew of the deceased pilot was not in line with “lawful investigative necessity”, whilst also quoting a specific section of ICAO, reported The Tribune:

“The summoning of Capt Anand, as also of other family members, is wholly without jurisdiction and contrary to the Aircraft (Investigation of Accidents and Incidents) Rules as well as ICAO Annex 13, which strictly confine accident investigations to technical, safety-oriented fact-finding and expressly prohibit attribution of blame or liability….”

Reiterating their position, the federation made clear that Captain Anand could not be considered a witness in any capacity, stating that he was “neither a factual witness nor a technical or expert witness in relation to the said accident”.

The pilots’ association further noted that the matter was already under judicial scrutiny. According to the legal notice, the father of the late Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, along with the pilot concerned, has moved the Supreme Court through a writ petition that questions, among other issues, the independence and impartiality of the investigation being carried out by the AAIB. Only a month ago, the Supreme Court clarified that the pilot was not at fault.

Probe Body Response to AAIB

In contrast to the FIP’s assertions, the AAIB has defended its approach, stating that investigators are empowered under the Aircraft (Investigation of Accidents and Incidents) Rules to call and examine “any witness relevant to the investigation”.

Referring to the Aircraft (Investigation of Accidents and Incidents) Rules, 2025, the AAIB added that investigators are authorized to call any witness they deem relevant, and the words of AAIB were quoted in India Today:

“According to the Aircraft (Investigation of Accidents and Incidents) Rules 2025, officials are empowered to summon and question any witness deemed relevant to a probe. Investigators can require such a witness to furnish or produce information or evidence or to answer or return to any inquiries he thinks fit to make..”

Compromising A Way Out?

Captain Anand has agreed to talk to AAIB despite the objections. When India’s flag carrier informed him of the summons, he agreed to respond to investigators’ questions via video conference. According to Republic World, “this compromise reflects both the federation’s insistence on protecting its members and the bureau’s determination to pursue every lead“.

Bottom Line

In September 2025, the Federation of Indian Pilots (FIP) wrote to the Ministry of Civil Aviation (MoCA) calling for a judicial probe, or Court of Inquiry, into the AI171 crash. The pilots’ body argued that the AAIB investigation had raised serious concerns about its credibility and called for an independent process to examine the circumstances surrounding the accident.

The FIP’s demand reflected wider concerns among pilots and aviation professionals about whether the investigation was being conducted with sufficient independence and transparency. The federation proposed that a Court of Inquiry should include a retired Supreme Court judge and independent specialists with expertise in flight operations, aircraft maintenance, avionics and flight-control systems.

The question of how India ultimately addresses these concerns, and what the completed investigation establishes about the causes of the Ahmedabad crash, will remain important for public confidence in the country’s aviation-safety framework.