New Delhi [India], July 14: The Indian Commercial Pilots’ Association (ICPA) has strongly condemned what it termed as “reckless and unfounded insinuations” suggesting pilot suicide as a possible cause behind the Air India AI-171 crash in Ahmedabad on June 12, 2025.
The pilot body issued a firm statement following the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau’s (AAIB) preliminary report, which noted that the fuel cutoff switches for both engines transitioned from ‘RUN’ to ‘CUTOFF’ seconds after takeoff. The incident resulted in the deaths of 241 people, including 229 passengers, 12 crew members, and 19 individuals on the ground.
While the AAIB’s report did not assign blame or determine a definitive cause, speculation on social media and in some media outlets implied intentional action by the cockpit crew. The ICPA has called such narratives irresponsible, insensitive, and damaging.
“Let us be unequivocally clear: there is absolutely no basis for such a claim at this stage,” the ICPA said. “Invoking such a serious allegation based on incomplete or preliminary information is not only irresponsible, it is deeply insensitive to the individuals and families involved.”
The association reiterated its full support for the AI-171 flight crew, highlighting that pilots are subject to rigorous psychological screening, recurrent training, and operate under strict safety protocols.
“To casually suggest pilot suicide in the absence of verified evidence is a gross violation of ethical reporting and a disservice to the dignity of the profession,” the statement emphasized.
The ICPA urged media organizations and public commentators to exercise restraint and empathy, emphasizing the need to wait for the final AAIB report.
“These inquiries are designed to uncover facts methodically and without bias,” the association said. “Until the official investigation concludes, any grave speculation must be condemned.”
It further added that the crew acted in line with their training and responsibilities during a highly challenging situation, and they should be supported, not vilified.