Air India flight diverted: 5 MPs write to LS Speaker alleging 'breach of privilege' by airline
Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla
on Tuesday over the incident of a Thiruvananthapuram-Delhi flight they were travelling in being diverted to Chennai and demanded action on alleged "
breach of privilege
" by Air India.
Venugopal and party colleagues K Suresh, Adoor Prakash and Robert Bruce, along with CPI(M)'s K Radhakrishnan also wrote to Civil Aviation Minister Rammohan Naidu and demanded an immediate investigation into the incident.
Finance
Value and Valuation Masterclass - Batch 4
By CA Himanshu Jain
View Program
Artificial Intelligence
AI For Business Professionals Batch 2
By Ansh Mehra
View Program
Finance
Value and Valuation Masterclass - Batch 3
By CA Himanshu Jain
View Program
Artificial Intelligence
AI For Business Professionals
By Vaibhav Sisinity
View Program
Finance
Value and Valuation Masterclass - Batch 2
By CA Himanshu Jain
View Program
Finance
Value and Valuation Masterclass Batch-1
By CA Himanshu Jain
View Program
In their letter to Birla, the five MPs said they wanted to bring to his attention the matter involving a "grave breach of privilege" by Air India, arising from events on Flight AI 2455 (Thiruvananthapuram to Delhi) on August 10.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Join new Free to Play WWII MMO War Thunder
War Thunder
Play Now
Undo
"On the said date, we were travelling along with hundreds of other passengers. The flight, scheduled for 7:15 PM, eventually departed around 8:30 PM citing the late arrival of the incoming aircraft. From the outset, the journey was marked by prolonged turbulence. Passengers were instructed to remain strapped in, and even basic inflight services such as dinner were withheld," the MPs said.
Midway through the flight, the pilot announced a critical technical fault -- failure of the weather radar -- and declared that the aircraft would be diverted to Chennai, they said.
Live Events
"This raised immediate concern since other airports such as Bengaluru and Coimbatore were closer to our location at the time. The decision to proceed to a farther airport, while allegedly 'flying blind' remains unexplained," the MPs wrote.
Upon reaching Chennai airspace, the aircraft did not land but continued to circle for more than an hour and the reason for this prolonged holding pattern was not clarified, they said.
"Eventually, during the first landing attempt, the aircraft had to execute a sudden go-around manoeuvre from a dangerously low altitude, reportedly due to 'something', possibly another aircraft on the runway, as per the pilot's announcement. Only on the second attempt did we land safely. We were finally boarded and flown to Delhi on another aircraft past midnight," the MPs said in their letter.
"Immediately after the incident, we placed the matter in the public domain through our social media accounts, highlighting the serious safety and procedural lapses witnessed first-hand. Instead of addressing these legitimate concerns, Air India has issued public statements portraying our account as false and misleading, thereby attempting to discredit elected Members of Parliament who were fulfilling their responsibility of raising issues of public safety," they said.
"This attempt to question our credibility and publicly misrepresent our statements amounts to a direct breach of privilege, as it seeks to intimidate and deter Members from discharging their constitutional duty to raise matters affecting citizens' safety and welfare," they said.
In the wake of the recent tragic air accident in Ahmedabad and several reported mid-air technical glitches across the country, flight safety is a matter of deep public concern, Venugopal and the four other MPs said, adding that rather than showing transparency and accountability, Air India has resorted to denial.
"We, therefore, request that this matter be taken up as a breach of privilege against Air India, and necessary action be initiated to safeguard the rights of Members of Parliament and to ensure that public safety concerns are addressed with seriousness and transparency," their letter to Birla said.
In their letter to the civil aviation minister, the MPs said that a time when the nation is still reeling from the recent tragic air accident in Ahmedabad and multiple reported mid-air technical incidents in recent months, such opacity from Air India is unacceptable.
"We therefore urge your ministry to order a comprehensive and time-bound investigation into this incident, covering both technical and procedural aspects, and to ensure that the findings are made public in full," they said.
"We also request that clear accountability be fixed, operational protocols for emergency diversions and runway safety be strengthened, and passengers be given truthful and timely communication in such situations," the MPs said.
Tagging both the letters, Venugopal said, "The harrowing experience we faced on our flight from Trivandrum to Delhi (AI2455) should serve as yet another wake up call for Air India, DGCA and the Civil Aviation Ministry to address the glaring lapses that result in such grave incidents."
"Air India's response to our concern was to label them as false -- which is an attempt at discrediting MPs who are raising genuine concerns regarding safety of air travel. Along with MPs Kodikkunil Suresh, Adoor Prakash, Robert Bruce and K. Radhakrishnan, have written to the Hon'ble Speaker regarding this Breach of Privilege on part of Air India," he said.
"We have also written to @MoCA_GoI demanding an immediate investigation into the incident," he said.
Air India on Monday had said the crew of the Thiruvananthapuram-Delhi flight that was diverted to Chennai on Sunday followed the protocols and the first landing attempt had to be aborted due to suspected foreign debris presence on the runway amid safety concerns raised by some Parliamentarians who were on board the aircraft.
Aviation watchdog DGCA said the flight was diverted to Chennai due to suspected malfunctioning of the weather radar of the aircraft, which landed safely, amid some Parliamentarians who were on board the plane flagging safety concerns.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scroll.in
21 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
How Jinnah survived an assassination attempt in Bombay
On a July day in 1943, Muhammad Ali Jinnah entered his secretary's room in his Malabar Hill bungalow to find a young man speaking with the secretary. The man was desperate for a meeting with the Muslim League leader. He hoped that if he could just speak to Jinnah, he might convince him to reach a compromise with the Congress and Mahatma Gandhi on the issue of India's partition. But instead of dialogue, there was violence. Aggravated by Jinnah's refusal to meet, the young man pulled a knife from his pocket and attempted to stab him in the throat. Jinnah managed to deflect the blade – just barely. He suffered a small puncture wound on his jaw and a gash across the back of his hand. His assailant, Rafiq Sabir Mozangvi, was quickly overpowered by the household staff and arrested by the Bombay Police. But one question lingered: who was this man, and had he travelled halfway across India to attack the leader of the Muslim League? Travels from Lahore The story begins weeks earlier in Lahore, when Mozangvi boarded a train to Delhi, driven by a burning political grievance. Although only 32, Mozangvi had lived many lives – working as an electrician, committing petty crime, serving short stints in prison, and shifting allegiances among the Indian National Congress, the Muslim League and the Ahrar Party. Eventually, he aligned with the Khaksar movement, a paramilitary group led by political theorist and Islamic scholar Allama Inayatullah Khan Mashriqi, who opposed the creation of Pakistan and believed Muslims could prosper in a united India. 'I decided to stay at Delhi for a day as I thought Mr. Jinnah might pass through there, but on making enquiries I was told that Mr. Jinnah was probably already in Bombay,' Mozaangvi told the Bombay Police in a statement. From Delhi, he took a train to Cawnpore, spending a few hours there, and then hopping on another train to Mughal Sarai. 'As I travelled all the way without a ticket, I found it necessary frequently to alight from the train and catch another train,' Mozaangvi said, 'and I eventually reached Bombay V.T. Station at sometime near 8 pm last night having travelled via Gwalior, Busaval, Bhopal, etc.' He wandered the bazaars at night, slept on the footpath, and bathed in a mosque – though he could not say exactly where, claiming his mind was 'obsessed with the object' of meeting Jinnah and discussing the 'political policy of the Muslim League'. He asked around for directions to Jinnah's house and was given a receipt by a Muslim League member bearing the printed address of Jinnah's bungalow on Mount Pleasant Road. Angry confrontation At the gates of the bungalow, Mozangvi told the security guard, a 'Pathan with a long moustache', that he wished to see Jinnah. He was escorted to Jinnah's secretary, AI Syed, who asked him to put his request in writing. As they spoke, Jinnah himself walked in and asked what the visitor wanted. From this point, accounts diverge. According to John Colville, the Commissioner of Police for Bombay, Mozangvi told 'Mr. Jinnah that he wanted to have an interview with him regarding the solution of the present political deadlock in the country and Mr. Jinnah's refusal to see Mr. Gandhi. Mr. Jinnah told him that he was very busy and had no time, and that Rafiq Sabir could make an appointment with his Secretary and could see him in a day or two.' This apparently enraged Mozangvi, who first punched Jinnah in the jaw and then tried to stab him. 'Mr. Jinnah warded off the blow and caught hold of the assailant's right hand with his left hand and in doing so sustained an incised wound on the back of his left hand one and half inches long skin deep,' Colville wrote in a letter to the Home Secretary. 'He also sustained a small punctured wound on the angle of the left jaw.' Jinnah's servants managed to subdue Mozangvi and summoned the police, who arrived promptly and arrested him. Mozangvi offered his own version of events. He claimed that when Jinnah entered the secretary's office, he pointed at him and said something in English. 'I stood up and saluted and explained to Mr. Jinnah that I had travelled a long way to see him and asked him to hear me,' Mozangvi said. 'Mr. Jinnah abruptly refused and pointed towards the door saying in English 'get out' or 'walk out.' I do not remember which expression he had used, but the purport of his words was that I should leave the place. I understand enough of the English language to know what was being said.' Mozangvi said he refused to leave and repeated his request for an interview. At that, Jinnah 'flew into a rage' and abused him, calling him a 'dog' and 'zalil (despicable)'. He claimed that Jinnah's servants tried to push him out of the room and struck him. 'I also used my fists in retaliation,' he said. 'Mr. Jinnah was standing nearby. During the struggle, I remembered a clasp knife that I had in my pocket and took it out in self-defence. I cannot say how Mr. Jinnah was injured.' During interrogation, Mozangvi insisted that his only purpose in meeting Jinnah was to urge him to speak with Gandhi. 'I have no real grudge against the Muslim League or against Mr. Jinnah personally, beyond my disapproval of certain points of policy followed by them.' He added that he believed Jinnah lacked sincerity in seeking a constructive dialogue with Gandhi. 'I disapprove of Mr. Jinnah's attitude in this matter and consider he is doing a disservice to Muhammedans and to India in general. On giving the matter considerable thought I came to the conclusion that Mr. Jinnah's true policy is one of self-aggrandisement and that he has no real desire to do anything towards ending the political deadlock in the country for the mutual benefit of all Indians.' Panic in Bombay The police report noted that Jinnah's injuries were not serious and were treated by Dr Massina on Pedder Road. Soon after, Jinnah addressed the press about the attack. 'Although it was a serious and well-planned attack, no serious injuries were inflicted on me,' he told Reuters. 'I do not want to say anything just now but I appeal to Muslims to remain calm and cool, and let us all thank Providence for this miraculous escape.' The news of the attempted assassination spread through Muslim neighborhoods in Bombay. Some shopkeepers shuttered their stores until Muslim League workers assured them there was no need to panic. 'All the newspapers, including the extreme Congress press, had condemned the attempt and congratulated Jinnah on his escape,' the Intelligence Bureau wrote in a confidential report. The Bombay Police contacted their counterparts in Lahore and requested that an officer be sent to interrogate Mozangvi to determine whether a broader conspiracy was at play, as the Muslim League alleged. 'I saw Mr. Jinnah shortly after the incident and in the course of conversation I questioned him as to whether in his opinion the action of the assailant was that of one man instigated by an idea which he developed in his own mind or whether it was an idea planted by someone else,' Commissioner Colvile wrote in a letter to the director of the Intelligence Bureau. 'Mr. Jinnah's opinion was that the idea had been planted there by Allama [Inayatullah Khan] Mashriqi, the Khaksar leader.' When Colville expressed his doubts, Jinnah replied that Mashriqi 'was a very indiscreet gentleman and also extremely pig-headed and obstinate'. The commissioner offered an alternative explanation. 'I suggested that a leader might convey to several of his trusted followers that Mr. Jinnah was an obstacle to Self-Government, and that if he were removed, their goal might be within reach. This small group might then have incited the assailant to commit this dastardly act,' Colville wrote. 'Mr. Jinnah doubted this and said that in his opinion Allama Mashriqi was so indiscreet and individualistic that it was not at all unlikely that he personally would have expressed such views to the assailant – and that the assailant, having absorbed the idea, decided to act on it.' The Criminal Investigation Department had a file on Mozangvi, revealing that he had lived in various parts of India, including Aligarh, where he ran a tea shop, and Calcutta, where he was wanted for theft in May 1943. He remained untraceable after the theft until he resurfaced in Bombay two months later. The file also revealed that Mozangvi had embezzled Khaksar funds in Cawnpore. The police found no direct evidence linking the assassination attempt to Mashriqi. Threat to life In November 1943, Mozangvi was sentenced to five years' imprisonment by the Bombay High Court. The court found no links between the attack and the Khaksar movement. Police records from 1943 reveal that there was another plot by members of the Khaksar movement to assassinate Jinnah that year. 'It was reported that one Abdul Rahim Dagh, a resident of Ambala district and Nazim Bab-i-Ali of the Delhi Khaksars, had called on Sadiq, alias Munir to Delhi, and detailed him to proceed to Bombay to murder Mr. Jinnah,' GAJ Boon, assistant director of the Intelligence Bureau, wrote in a December 1943 report. When members of the movement in Delhi heard about the plot, they immediately informed Mashriqi. 'It was reported that Allama Mashriqi ordered that the plan must be frustrated at all costs,' Boon noted. The bureau remained vigilant, monitoring individual Khaksar members who might attempt to assassinate Jinnah. 'While, therefore, there is no evidence at present that the Khaksars are planning to assassinate Mr. Jinnah, it remains true that the Khaksars are not particularly pleased with him and the possibility of an individual attempt to harm him physically cannot, in the circumstances, be entirely discounted,' Boon added. 'Fortunately Rafiq Sabir has received heavy punishment for his attack on Mr. Jinnah and this may deter others from repeating the performance.' Mashriqi, who opposed the partition of India until the end, would go on to become a citizen of Pakistan after its formation. He remained politically active until his death in 1963.
The Hindu
21 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Dharmasthala burial: Political temperature soars as no major recovery after digging 17 spots
With no major discovery of skeletal remains in Dharmasthala after digging 17 spots listed by a man who claimed to have buried multiple bodies between 1995 and 2014, the political temperature in Karnataka seems to be soaring. The opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which tried to corner the government over the issue in the ongoing legislature session, has planned a protest in the pilgrim town claiming that the Congress-led State Government is 'hurting religious sentiments of the Hindus'. This has pushed the Congress into damage-control mode. Deputy Chief Minister and Congress party chief D.K. Shivakumar said there was a systematic conspiracy to 'tarnish' the image of Dharmasthala, and said the government would stand by the holy site's administrators. Dharmasthala case: A timeline June 22: Two advocates Ojasvi Gowda and Sachin Desai claim that a former sanitation worker who worked with Sri Kshetra Dharmasthala temple between 1995 and 2014, is ready to show sites of mass burial where he was forced to bury bodies of those allegedly 'sexually harassed and murdered', including many women. July 3-4: The whistleblower lodges a written complaint with Dakshina Kannada police, who register a FIR based on his complaint. July 11: The complainant made a voluntary statement before a Belthangady court and submitted partial skeletal remains he claimed to have buried years ago and exhumed himself July 15: Sujatha Bhat lodged a complaint that her daughter Ananya Bhat, studying medicine, went missing in 2003 after visiting Dharmasthala July 19: State Government forms Special Investigation Team (SIT) led by Director General of Police Pronab Mohanty July 28: The complainant showed 13 sites around Netravati bathing ghat and surrounding forest area where he claimed to have buried bodies. SIT conducted mahazar of these 13 sites. of these 13 sites. July 29: SIT starts digging at the sites August 4: A second complainant, Jayanth T., claims to show a site where the body of a minor girl was buried. Home Minister Dr. G. Parameshwara, while defending the SIT probe, said if the complainant's claims are proved to be false, they would initiate action against him. No major recovery Of the 17 sites dug up by the SIT, partial human skeletal remains - 14 bones - were found at only one place — site number 6. Unless forensic experts conclude that the person whose remains were found at site number 6 was indeed murdered, which is reportedly tough given that the entire skeleton has not been found, that case will also hit a dead end, sources said. Diggings and findings till now SIT has, till date, dug 17 sites shown by the complainant, and recovered partial skeletal remains at only one site. Site number 6: SIT recovers partial skeletal remains, 14 bones, including teeth and some fragments of the skull. Prima facie forensic doctors have ruled the remains are that of a male. forensic doctors have ruled the remains are that of a male. Site number 13: The complainant had claimed it to be a mass grave where he had buried 60-100 bodies, at a depth of over 16 feet. Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) deployed, but it drew a blank, no remains found when the site was dug. Site number 14: When SIT reached to dig Site 11, the complainant claimed that the actual site was a short distance away, and led the team to a spot around 150 metres away to a place called Banglegudda, now marked Site 14. SIT recovered partial skeletal remains, 81 bones, including skull and backbone column, prima facie, of a male, lying on the ground. They also recovered male garments and a red saree hanging from a tree, indicating that it could be a case of suicide. When they dug the site, no remains were found. The remains found at site 14 — 81 bones — is said to be a likely case of suicide, suspected to be a recent case. If forensic reports indeed indicate the person died recently, it raises questions as to how the complainant, who claims to have left Dharmasthala in 2014, knew of the case. In both cases, skeletal remains found are, prima facie, said to be of males. The complainant had submitted partial skeletal remains, which he claimed to be that of a woman he buried over a decade ago and exhumed recently. However, these remains also belong to a male, forensic reports have indicated. The complainant's sensational claims of mass graves with 60-100 bodies at site number 13 have also fallen flat. The road ahead The SIT is likely to dig only a few more spots and not all spots where the complainant claims to have buried bodies. The complainant listed five specific instances of burying bodies in his voluntary statement in a court. Three of those five sites have already been dug up, and no remains have been found. The SIT is likely to dig the remaining two spots. The SIT will also likely dig a few other key spots where the complainant claims to have buried bodies. A second complaint, by Jayanth T., is also set to be probed by the SIT. Jayanth T. claims to have been a witness to the burial of a 13-year-old girl, the investigation into whose death was botched up by the police who made it out to be that of a middle-aged woman who committed suicide by consuming poison. The SIT has been trying to procure documents pertaining to the Unnatural Death Report (UDR) case, and is yet to take a call on digging the spot. If no remains are found at any of these spots, the SIT may initiate legal action against the complainant, as per the statement of the Home Minister in the Assembly. Meanwhile, the SIT will probe the two partial skeletal remains found, and the missing case of Ananya Bhat, given by her mother Sujatha Bhat.
The Hindu
21 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Want GST 2.0 to be Good and Simple Tax not Growth Suppressing Tax: Congress
The Congress on Saturday (August 16, 2025) demanded an official discussion paper on GST 2.0 soon for a wider debate on it and said the reform should be towards a "Good and Simple Tax" in letter, spirit, and compliance, and not the "Growth Suppressing Tax" it has become. The Opposition party's assertion came a day after Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced that GST rates will be lowered by Diwali, bringing down prices of everyday use items, as his government looks to reform the eight-year-old regime that has been plagued by litigation and evasion. Independence Day highlights Congress general secretary in-charge of communications, Jairam Ramesh, said that for well over a year and a half at least, the party has been calling for a radically transformed GST 2.0. Noting that a transformed GST 2.0 was a key pledge in the Congress manifesto for the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, Mr. Ramesh on Friday (August 15, 2025) said the Prime Minister seems to have finally woken up to the fact that economic growth will simply not accelerate unless this transformation takes place and increases private consumption and private investment. "Over the last seven years, the spirit of GST has been vitiated by an increased number of rates and the granting of multiple exemptions. The structure also seems to have facilitated evasion. There must be a drastic reduction in the number of rates," he said in a statement. The Congress leader said simplification of the rate structure is essential, but must be done in a manner that minimises revenue uncertainty to states and also eliminates the classification disputes that have become so common. "The GST compensation cess expires on March 31, 2026. This must be extended to offset any revenue uncertainty from the rationalisation of the rate structure." Mr. Ramesh said the widespread concerns of MSMEs — the major employment generators in the economy — must be addressed meaningfully, he said, adding that apart from major procedural changes in GST, this will involve further increasing the thresholds that must apply to interstate supplies as well. Sectoral issues that have surfaced, for instance, in textiles, tourism, exporters, handicrafts and agricultural inputs, must be tackled, he said. In addition, States should be incentivised to move towards the introduction of State-level GST to cover electricity, alcohol, petroleum, and real estate as well, the Congress leader opined. "The Indian National Congress demands an official discussion paper on GST 2.0 very soon so that there can be an informed and wider debate on this vital and pressing national issue. "GST 2.0 should be truly a Good and Simple Tax (GST) in letter, spirit, and compliance, not like the Growth Suppressing Tax (GST) it has become," Mr. Ramesh said. Soon after the Prime Minister's announcement from the ramparts of the Red Fort on the 79th Independence Day, the Union Finance Ministry said it has proposed that most goods and services be taxed in two slabs — standard and merit — and a select few items be charged special rates. This is to replace the current goods and services tax (GST) structure, where sale of goods and rendering of services are taxed in four different brackets — 5%, 12%, 18% and 28% — with luxury and sin goods attracting a levy on top of the highest rate of 28 per cent. "This Diwali, I am going to make it a double Diwali for you," Modi had said in his address to the nation. Stating that over the past eight years, his government has undertaken major GST reforms, the prime minister said, "We have discussed with states and we are bringing next-generation GST reforms that will reduce the tax burden across the country." "Tax on items for the common man will be reduced substantially. Our MSMEs will benefit hugely. Daily use items will become cheaper, which will also strengthen our economy," he had said. GST, which subsumed a host of taxes and local levies, was rolled out on July 1, 2017.
