© The Indian Express Pvt Ltd
Tags:
Journalism of Courage
Expressing grave concern over the “nasty reporting” in the foreign press blaming the Air India Boeing Dreamliner crash on pilot error, the Supreme Court on Friday issued notice to the Centre on a plea by one of the deceased pilots seeking an independent probe into the June 12 accident in which 260 people were killed.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi issued notice to the Centre on the plea by Pushkar Raj Sabharwal, the father of Commander Sumeet Sabharwal.
“It’s extremely unfortunate that this accident took place, and this gentleman lost his son. But he should not carry this burden that his son is being accused or blamed or anything… Report also, that language, if at all it is creating this kind of wrong impression, we will clarify. Nobody can blame him for anything. There is no question,” Justice Kant told Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, who appeared for the father.
Sankaranarayanan referred the bench to Rule 12 of the Aircraft (Investigation of Accidents and Incidents) Rules, and said it enjoins that the Centre will order an independent investigation. “That has not happened. What has happened is a preliminary investigation under Rule 9,” the senior advocate said.
On behalf of the pilot’s father, he said, “I am the father of the Commander of the plane… I am 91 years old. This is a non-independent investigation. It should have been independent. It has taken four months.”
To this, Justice Bagchi said there is “no insinuation against the pilot”.
“See page 202… It just records a cockpit recorder which says one pilot enquires of the other: ‘Have you switched off the fuel switch?’, and he says ‘No’. So, there’s no question of the report apportioning blame, and, in fact, the Rules and the AIB investigation are not to apportion blame. It’s to propose better performance and the avoidance of such accidents in the future. Where is the cause of action in this writ petition?”
When Sankaranarayanan said that despite the confidentiality associated with the probe, the Wall Street Journal carried a report “based on information they have got from this investigation, Justice Bagchi said, “We are not bothered about what a foreign press (reports)”.
However, the senior counsel said, “I am. My son is being attacked.”
Justice Bagchi said, “Then your suit should have been against the Wall Street Journal in an American court”.
To that, Sankaranarayana said the report is citing an Indian government source. “Doesn’t matter. This is by a foreign press whose insinuation is incorrect,” said Justice Bagchi. “This kind of nasty reporting only because they want to blame India…”, Justice Kant added.
“They (investigators) repeatedly insinuate when they come and visit me,” said Sankaranarayan,
The court finally agreed to hear it with another petition also seeking a probe into the matter on November 10.
