'Want To Blame Pilots....We Don't Accept It': Kin Of Air India Crash Victims On Probe Report
The relative of a victim said that he has dismissed the compensation amount offered by the airline, adding that he would take them to court for 'killing our family members'.
Relatives of those killed in the Air India plane crash in Gujarat on 12 June have criticised the preliminary probe report, with some also calling it a 'cover-up".
'This report is wrong. We don't accept it," said Ameen Siddiqui, the brother-in-law of British national and Gloucestershire resident Akeel Nanabawa — who died along with his wife, Hannaa Vorajee and their daughter Sara in the crash.
Siddiqui told the UK's The Telegraph that 'they want to blame dead pilots who can't defend themselves". He also mentioned that he has dismissed the compensation amount offered by the airline, adding that he would take them to court for 'killing our family members".
A relative of another victim, Vallabh Nagji Agheda, called the probe a 'cover-up" for Air India and Boeing. Vallabh Nagji was travelling with his wife, Vinaben Vallabh Agheda, when the tragedy unfolded.
'We were pre-empting that they would start blaming the pilots. Why are they not looking for a mechanical fault? How qualified are the people in the Indian Air Accident Investigation Bureau? The FAA (US aviation regulator) gave an advisory in 2018 to check the potential disengagement of the fuel control switch locking feature. Shouldn't they have made this a mandatory requirement rather than an advisory?" Joge asked.
Speaking to TOI, the youngest son of the Agheda couple said, 'It does not look like it's the pilot's fault. It could be Boeing's design fault with the switches, or it could be Air India's maintenance issues. Most of the families believe it's a problem with the aircraft. Air India is helping us with compensation but we are more concerned about getting the right report. We want the truth to make sure another disaster doesn't happen."
The Indian Commercial Pilots' Association (ICPA) on Sunday raised concerns over the probe report into the Air India crash, saying they are 'deeply disturbed".
'In the aftermath of this incident, we are deeply disturbed by speculative narratives emerging in sections of the media and public discourse — particularly the reckless and unfounded insinuation of pilot suicide," said the ICPA.
In an official statement, the ICPA called the accusations against the AI171 pilots and flight crew a 'gross violation" and a 'disservice to the profession".
Air India Crash Probe Report
The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), in its preliminary report on the crash that killed 260 people on 12 June, said the fuel switches to the engines were cut off within a gap of 1 second immediately after take-off, causing confusion in the cockpit of Air India flight AI171.
A five-member team appointed by the AAIB is probing the crash, which is also the first case where a Boeing 787 Dreamliner accident resulted in hull loss.
view comments
First Published:
July 14, 2025, 09:26 IST
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
4 hours ago
- Economic Times
British military Afghan data breach exposed: government cover-up risked 100,000 lives
British Ministry of Defence headquarters in London, where officials orchestrated Operation Rubific to contain Afghan data breach that exposed thousands of lives to Taliban threats The British military faces scrutiny after a catastrophic data breach exposed up to 100,000 Afghans to potential Taliban retaliation, prompting successive governments to deploy an unprecedented legal cover-up lasting nearly two February 2022, a British soldier accidentally transmitted a database containing 33,000 Afghan records to unauthorized recipients while attempting to verify sanctuary applications. The breach remained secret until August 2023, when an anonymous Afghan threatened to publish the information on Facebook. Also read: UK defence ministry fined for Afghan data breach during ...The leaked database included sensitive personal information about Afghans who had applied for the UK's Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap), along with family members' details, phone numbers, and email addresses of British government lawyers warned that if the Taliban obtained the dataset, as many as 100,000 Afghans would face "risk of death, torture, intimidation or harassment." The figure encompassed primary applicants and their family members, some of whom were specifically named in the compromised records. "The fact that the Taliban may be in possession of 33,000 Arap applications, including the primary applicants' phone numbers and all the case evidence, is simply bone-chilling," wrote Person A, an activist helping Afghan refugees, in an email to then-Armed Forces Minister James Heappey. Following the breach discovery, the Ministry of Defence launched Operation Rubific, a covert mission to evacuate affected Afghans while preventing public disclosure. The operation included the largest peacetime covert evacuation in British history. Defence Secretary John Healey revealed Tuesday that 18,500 Afghans affected by the breach have already been relocated to the UK, with an additional 5,400 scheduled for evacuation. The total cost of addressing the breach reached £850 million for 6,900 individuals, according to MoD read: UK launched secret scheme to relocate Afghans after data leak, documents showThe Conservative government secured a superinjunction from the High Court on September 1, 2023, preventing any public disclosure of the breach or the court order's existence. The order remained in place for 683 days, making it the longest superinjunction in British legal history and the first sought by a continued advocating for the superinjunction after taking power in July 2024. Mr Justice Chamberlain criticized the order as a "wholly novel use" of superinjunctions, stating it was "fundamentally objectionable for decisions that affect the lives and safety of thousands of human beings, and involve the commitment of billions of pounds of public money, to be taken in circumstances where they are completely insulated from public debate."While the superinjunction remained active, the government approved spending up to £7 billion over five years to relocate 25,000 affected Afghans under the secret Afghan Response Route (ARR) scheme. Chancellor Rachel Reeves signed off on the plan in October 2024, with the cabinet's home and economic affairs committee deeming it "appropriate." The policy was subsequently expanded in June 2025 to include more than 42,500 individuals before an independent review questioned its necessity. Defence Secretary Healey announced Tuesday the closure of the ARR scheme, leaving thousands of affected Afghans behind. The breach originated when a soldier working under General Sir Gwyn Jenkins at Regent's Park Barracks sent the database to Afghan contacts twice in February 2022. The recipients passed the information to other Afghans, with at least one copy reaching individuals in MoD remained unaware of the breach until August 14, 2023, when an anonymous Afghan posted details on a Facebook group, threatening to publish the complete dataset. Government officials immediately alerted approximately 1,800 Afghans in Pakistan about potential data compromise. Also read: Largest population purge this decade? Iran expels half a million Afghans in rapid crackdown post-Israel wa Independent review questions superinjunction justificationRetired civil servant Paul Rimmer's independent review, ordered by Defence Secretary Healey, concluded that early Taliban targeting concerns had "diminished" and the superinjunction may have worsened the situation by increasing the dataset's value to hostile actors. The review noted that given existing Taliban intelligence capabilities, the dataset was "unlikely to provide considerably new or highly pertinent information." It also warned that publicity surrounding the breach revelation would "clearly be likely to attract Taliban interest in obtaining it." Manchester-based Barings Law represents approximately 1,000 breach victims preparing legal action that could cost taxpayers more than £250 million. The firm criticized the MoD's response as "wholly inadequate," particularly an email apology sent to affected individuals Tuesday morning. "Through its careless handling of such sensitive information, the MoD has put multiple lives at risk, damaged its own reputation, and put the success of future operations in jeopardy by eroding trust in its data security measures," Barings Law stated. Defence Secretary Healey apologized to Parliament Tuesday for the "serious departmental error," acknowledging that "full accountability to parliament and freedom of the press matter deeply to me — they're fundamental to our British way of life."Defence Committee Chairman Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi called the situation "a mess and wholly unacceptable," indicating potential parliamentary investigation into the breach's circumstances and government superinjunction's lifting enables public scrutiny of government decisions that affected thousands of lives and committed billions in public expenditure without democratic oversight. Many affected Afghans only learned of their exposure through government emails sent Tuesday, nearly three years after the initial breach. Also read: Pakistan in no rush to recognise Taliban government in Afghanistan, say officials Ongoing security concerns for Afghan refugeesIndividuals in the UK and Pakistan reportedly still possess copies of the compromised database, with at least one case involving monetary exchange for the information. The MoD has implemented new security software and appointed a chief information officer to prevent future breaches. Former British Ambassador to Afghanistan Sir William Patey described the incident as a "spectacular data breach," noting that the Taliban were already targeting individuals associated with western forces. "Providing the Taliban with a list would have made their job that much easier," he told Times Radio. The breach highlights systemic data security failures within the Ministry of Defence, with legal experts noting it represents "just the latest in a long line of data breaches by the MoD of personal data of Afghan citizens who had previously worked with UK armed forces."
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
British military Afghan data breach exposed: government cover-up risked 100,000 lives
Massive Afghan data breach reveals government secrecy The British military faces scrutiny after a catastrophic data breach exposed up to 100,000 Afghans to potential Taliban retaliation, prompting successive governments to deploy an unprecedented legal cover-up lasting nearly two years. In February 2022, a British soldier accidentally transmitted a database containing 33,000 Afghan records to unauthorized recipients while attempting to verify sanctuary applications. The breach remained secret until August 2023, when an anonymous Afghan threatened to publish the information on Facebook. Also read: UK defence ministry fined for Afghan data breach during ... Taliban kill list threatens Afghan lives The leaked database included sensitive personal information about Afghans who had applied for the UK's Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap), along with family members' details, phone numbers, and email addresses of British government officials. Government lawyers warned that if the Taliban obtained the dataset, as many as 100,000 Afghans would face "risk of death, torture, intimidation or harassment." The figure encompassed primary applicants and their family members, some of whom were specifically named in the compromised records. "The fact that the Taliban may be in possession of 33,000 Arap applications, including the primary applicants' phone numbers and all the case evidence, is simply bone-chilling," wrote Person A, an activist helping Afghan refugees, in an email to then-Armed Forces Minister James Heappey. Operation Rubific: secret evacuation mission Following the breach discovery, the Ministry of Defence launched Operation Rubific, a covert mission to evacuate affected Afghans while preventing public disclosure. The operation included the largest peacetime covert evacuation in British history. Live Events Defence Secretary John Healey revealed Tuesday that 18,500 Afghans affected by the breach have already been relocated to the UK, with an additional 5,400 scheduled for evacuation. The total cost of addressing the breach reached £850 million for 6,900 individuals, according to MoD figures. Also read: UK launched secret scheme to relocate Afghans after data leak, documents show Government superinjunction prevents media coverage The Conservative government secured a superinjunction from the High Court on September 1, 2023, preventing any public disclosure of the breach or the court order's existence. The order remained in place for 683 days, making it the longest superinjunction in British legal history and the first sought by a government. Labour continued advocating for the superinjunction after taking power in July 2024. Mr Justice Chamberlain criticized the order as a "wholly novel use" of superinjunctions, stating it was "fundamentally objectionable for decisions that affect the lives and safety of thousands of human beings, and involve the commitment of billions of pounds of public money, to be taken in circumstances where they are completely insulated from public debate." £7 billion Afghan response plan approved in secret While the superinjunction remained active, the government approved spending up to £7 billion over five years to relocate 25,000 affected Afghans under the secret Afghan Response Route (ARR) scheme. Chancellor Rachel Reeves signed off on the plan in October 2024, with the cabinet's home and economic affairs committee deeming it "appropriate." The policy was subsequently expanded in June 2025 to include more than 42,500 individuals before an independent review questioned its necessity. Defence Secretary Healey announced Tuesday the closure of the ARR scheme, leaving thousands of affected Afghans behind. Data breach timeline reveals government delays The breach originated when a soldier working under General Sir Gwyn Jenkins at Regent's Park Barracks sent the database to Afghan contacts twice in February 2022. The recipients passed the information to other Afghans, with at least one copy reaching individuals in Pakistan. The MoD remained unaware of the breach until August 14, 2023, when an anonymous Afghan posted details on a Facebook group, threatening to publish the complete dataset. Government officials immediately alerted approximately 1,800 Afghans in Pakistan about potential data compromise. Also read: Largest population purge this decade? Iran expels half a million Afghans in rapid crackdown post-Israel wa Independent review questions superinjunction justification Retired civil servant Paul Rimmer's independent review, ordered by Defence Secretary Healey, concluded that early Taliban targeting concerns had "diminished" and the superinjunction may have worsened the situation by increasing the dataset's value to hostile actors. The review noted that given existing Taliban intelligence capabilities, the dataset was "unlikely to provide considerably new or highly pertinent information." It also warned that publicity surrounding the breach revelation would "clearly be likely to attract Taliban interest in obtaining it." Legal action threatens £250 million government payout Manchester-based Barings Law represents approximately 1,000 breach victims preparing legal action that could cost taxpayers more than £250 million. The firm criticized the MoD's response as "wholly inadequate," particularly an email apology sent to affected individuals Tuesday morning. "Through its careless handling of such sensitive information, the MoD has put multiple lives at risk, damaged its own reputation, and put the success of future operations in jeopardy by eroding trust in its data security measures," Barings Law stated. Parliamentary accountability demands government transparency Defence Secretary Healey apologized to Parliament Tuesday for the "serious departmental error," acknowledging that "full accountability to parliament and freedom of the press matter deeply to me — they're fundamental to our British way of life." Defence Committee Chairman Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi called the situation "a mess and wholly unacceptable," indicating potential parliamentary investigation into the breach's circumstances and government response. The superinjunction's lifting enables public scrutiny of government decisions that affected thousands of lives and committed billions in public expenditure without democratic oversight. Many affected Afghans only learned of their exposure through government emails sent Tuesday, nearly three years after the initial breach. Also read: Pakistan in no rush to recognise Taliban government in Afghanistan, say officials Ongoing security concerns for Afghan refugees Individuals in the UK and Pakistan reportedly still possess copies of the compromised database, with at least one case involving monetary exchange for the information. The MoD has implemented new security software and appointed a chief information officer to prevent future breaches. Former British Ambassador to Afghanistan Sir William Patey described the incident as a "spectacular data breach," noting that the Taliban were already targeting individuals associated with western forces. "Providing the Taliban with a list would have made their job that much easier," he told Times Radio . The breach highlights systemic data security failures within the Ministry of Defence, with legal experts noting it represents "just the latest in a long line of data breaches by the MoD of personal data of Afghan citizens who had previously worked with UK armed forces."
The Hindu
5 hours ago
- The Hindu
U.K. launched secret scheme to relocate Afghans after data leak, documents show
Britain set up a secret scheme to relocate thousands of Afghans to the U.K. after a soldier accidentally disclosed the personal details of more than 33,000 people, putting them at risk of reprisals from the Taliban, court documents showed on Tuesday (July 15, 2025). A judge at London's High Court said in a May 2024 judgment first made public on Tuesday (July 15, 2025) that about 20,000 people may have to be offered relocation to Britain, a move that would likely cost "several billion pounds". Britain's current Defence Minister John Healey said that around 4,500 affected people "are in Britain or in transit ... at a cost of around 400 million pounds". The government is also facing lawsuits from those affected by the breach, further adding to the ultimate cost of the incident. A Ministry of Defence-commissioned review of the data breach, a summary of which was also published on Tuesday (July 15, 2025), said more than 16,000 people affected by it had been relocated to the U.K. as of May this year. The British government was forced to act after the breach revealed the names of Afghans who had helped British forces in Afghanistan before they withdrew from the country in chaotic circumstances in 2021. The details emerged on Tuesday (July 15, 2025) after a legal ruling known as a superinjunction was lifted. The injunction had been granted in 2023 after the MoD argued that a public disclosure of the breach could put people at risk of extra-judicial killing or serious violence by the Taliban. The dataset contained personal information of nearly 19,000 Afghans who had applied to be relocated to Britain and their families. It was released in error in early 2022, before the MoD spotted the breach in August 2023, when part of the dataset was published on Facebook. The former Conservative government obtained the injunction the following month. Prime Minister Keir Starmer's centre-left government, which was elected last July, launched a review into the injunction, the breach and the relocation scheme, which found that although Afghanistan remains dangerous, there was little evidence of intent by the Taliban to conduct a campaign of retribution.
