News & Current Events

Families Demand Answers After Pilot’s Personal Struggles Come To Light

Published on July 19, 2025

Hours before taking off on the fateful flight, the pilot of an Air India aircraft that crashed last month, killing 260 people, had vowed to return home.

On June 12, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner crashed into a residential area in Ahmedabad, killing 241 persons on board and 19 on the ground. The senior pilot, Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, 56, was on board.

Investigators are looking into claims that the seasoned pilot, who had over 8,200 hours in the cockpit, shut off the plane’s fuel switches, leading it to lose power.

After departing for London at 1:38 p.m., the aircraft flew for perhaps 30 seconds before losing power and crashing to the ground. All but one person on board perished as it struck and was consumed by a massive conflagration.

Two fuel switches, which are used to start or stop the engines and are normally left on during flight, were switched from “Run” to “Cutoff” prior to the accident, depriving the engines of gasoline, according to a preliminary report into the disaster.

The study also showed that after Sabharwal and his 28-year-old co-pilot Clive Kunder realized the mistake, there was uncertainty in the cabin until frantic attempts were made to switch them back.

Records of the communication from the Boeing’s black box, according to people familiar with the investigation, lend credence to the theory that the captain stopped the fuel supply to the aircraft’s engines.

However, Sabharwal’s parting remarks to a security officer at his apartment building, where his aging father also resided, would seem to indicate otherwise. “Please, look after Papa.” Hours before the crash, he reportedly claimed, “I will be back soon.”

The notion that Sabharwal was at fault is also denied by friends and coworkers, who describe him as a “gentle soul” and an “ace pilot” who had never been involved in a significant incident before the crash.

Neil Pais, 61, a former colleague of Sabharwal, told The Telegraph he was “one of the nicest people you could ever hope to fly with.”

“He had absolutely no airs about himself, so humble, so respectful. Always a smile when he spoke to you,” he added.

“I never once saw him raise his voice or lose his temper. And yet he never compromised on work or safety. If there was an issue, he’d point it out, but always in the nicest possible way.”

Captain Kapil Kohal, a close friend and colleague, described Sabharwal as a “hero” with a “gentle soul.”

He stated that despite being known as “Sad Sack” due to his “melancholic eyes,” Sabharwal was “deeply charismatic and always ready to help.”

However, his peers’ anguish was the outcome of a more serious catastrophe.

The loss of his mother in 2022 had been difficult for Sabharwal to accept, and he had moved from Delhi to Mumbai to be nearer to his aging father, Pushkaraj, after divorcing his wife.

After’several’ Air India pilots purportedly testified Sabharwal had poor mental health, investigations into the terrible incident have reportedly started to analyze his behavior.

After his mother passed away, he is believed to have taken mourning leave. However, before the deadly crash, he was’medically certified’ by Air India, according to the belief.

Additionally, friends disclosed that Sabharwal had contemplated quitting his job as a pilot in order to provide full-time care for his father, who is 90 years old.

Sabharwal would frequently come to see his father ‘for two or three days’ and take him for walks in the evenings, according to Sunil Lokhande, the security guard at his Mumbai apartment complex.

Along with giving Lokhande money to buy meals, the pilot would also purchase fruits and vegetables to share with him.

These particulars raise more concerns about why the pilot would have chosen to turn off the fuel switches just seconds after takeoff—a decision that aviation experts have called “absolutely bizarre.”

According to preliminary evaluations by U.S. officials, the weight of evidence from the conversation suggests that the captain was guilty, even though there was no cockpit video recording that could conclusively identify which pilot pulled the switches.

‘As the pilot actively flying, [First Officer] Kunder undoubtedly would have had his hands full pulling back on the Dreamliner’s controls at that stage of the flight,’ the Wall Street Journal said this week, citing American pilots who were aware with the AAIB findings.

A preliminary investigation issued by Indian officials on Sunday raised concerns about the pilot’s motivation for manually shutting off the switches and whether it was a catastrophic error or a conscious decision.

The report said: “In the cockpit voice recording, one of the pilots is heard asking the other: why did he cut off? The other pilot responded that he did not do so.”

In every flight, pilots will turn the fuel switches on and off at the appropriate moments; but, this time, the landing gear was not raised and the fuel was turned off immediately after takeoff.

At takeoff, the captain was keeping an eye on things while the co-pilot piloted the aircraft.

Within seconds, the switches were flicked back to ‘run’, the report continued, initiating the relighting of the engines.

While the other engine was in the process of restoring power, the first engine had relitted but had not restored power.

However, switches were discovered in the “run” position at the scene of the collision.

A breathalyzer test revealed that both pilots were ‘fit to operate’ after a sufficient rest period prior to the trip, according to the report.

The weight was ‘within acceptable limits’ and the aircraft was free of hazardous materials.

‘No major bird activity’ was seen in and around the aircraft’s flight route, and fuel samples collected from the tanks were examined and confirmed to be’satisfactory’.

However, Mr. Ranganthan has earlier hinted that it might have been intentional.

They include additional safety guard brackets to guard against any bumps and nudges, and each lever must be lifted higher to free it before it can be flipped.

Explaining that he believed it “had to be done manually”, Mr Ranganathan told NDTV of the fuel levers: “The fuel selectors they aren’t the sliding type they are always in a slot.”

“They are to pull them out or move them up or down, so the question of them moving inadvertently out of off position doesn’t happen. It’s a case of deliberate manual selection.”

He later said “nothing else” would explain why both switches were moved into the off position just after take off, alleging: “It had to be deliberately done.”

When questioned if he was suggesting one of the pilots “deliberately” switched off the fuel lever, while fully aware of the possibility of a crash, he answered, “Absolutely,” before asserting they were looking at a potential “pilot-induced crash.”

However, family members of a few crash victims have charged the airline and the Indian government with attempting to place the responsibility for the accident on the pilots.

Ameen Siddiqui, 28, whose brother-in-law, Akeel Nanabawa, died alongside his wife and their four-year-old daughter said: “This report is wrong. We don’t accept it.”

From Surat, south of Ahmedabad, where the plane crashed, Mr. Siddiqui told The Telegraph, “It’s a cover-up to protect Air India and the government.”

“They want to blame dead pilots who can’t defend themselves. How can the fuel switches end up turning off at a critical moment, either through pilot error or a mechanical fault?”

The RAT, or ram air turbine, was activated immediately after takeoff, according to airport CCTV footage.

In an emergency, the RAT serves as a backup power source and will activate in the event of a total power outage.

‘Mayday, Mayday, Mayday’ was transmitted by one of the pilots two minutes after takeoff, according to the investigation.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the US aviation regulator, issued a warning to airlines in December 2018 about fuel switches ‘with the locking function off’ in certain Boeing 737s.

In a Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin, the FAA cautioned that “if the locking feature is disengaged, the switch can be moved between the two positions without lifting the switch during transition, and the switch would be exposed to the potential of inadvertent operation.”

“Inadvertent operation of the switch could result in an unintended consequence, such as an in-flight engine shutdown.”

In order to determine “whether the fuel control switch can be moved between the two positions without lifting up the switch,” it was advised that airlines examine the switches.

Concerns about airworthiness were deemed insufficient to justify a legally binding rule to address dangerous conditions.

According to Air India, the FAA’s notice was “advisory and not mandatory,” hence these checks were not conducted.

An Air India spokesperson previously said: “Air India stands in solidarity with the families and those affected by the AI171 accident. We continue to mourn the loss and are fully committed to providing support during this difficult time. We acknowledge receipt of the preliminary report released by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) today, 12 July 2025.”

“Air India is working closely with stakeholders, including regulators. We continue to fully cooperate with the AAIB and other authorities as their investigation progresses.”

“Given the active nature of the investigation, we are unable to comment on specific details and refer all such enquiries to the AAIB.”