A chilling new development has emerged in the investigation of the tragic crash of Air India Flight 171, which claimed 260 lives on June 12, 2025, just 32 seconds after takeoff from Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport in Ahmedabad, India. The Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, bound for London Gatwick, plummeted into the campus of B.J. Medical College, killing 241 passengers and crew onboard and 19 people on the ground. Now, a leaked still from the cockpit camera, obtained by The Times of India and verified by aviation experts, has deepened the mystery surrounding the disaster. The image, captured moments before the crash, shows Captain Sumeet Sabharwal reaching toward the fuel control switches—an action that aligns with the preliminary report’s finding that both switches were moved to the “cutoff” position, starving the engines of fuel. This revelation has sparked intense speculation: Was it a catastrophic pilot error, a mechanical glitch, or something more sinister? As investigators scramble to analyze the data, the world is left grappling with more questions than answers.

The Crash: A 30-Second Tragedy

Air India Flight 171 was a routine international flight carrying 242 passengers and crew, including 169 Indians, 53 British, 7 Portuguese, and 1 Canadian national. The 12-year-old Boeing 787, registered as VT-ANB, pushed back from the gate at 13:13 IST and was cleared for a full-length takeoff on runway 23 at 13:37:33. CCTV footage shows the aircraft lifting off smoothly at 13:38:39, reaching a maximum altitude of 625 feet and an airspeed of 180 knots. But just three seconds later, both fuel control switches moved to “cutoff,” triggering a dual-engine failure. A panicked “MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY” call was issued at 13:38:05, followed by silence as the aircraft crashed into a medical college hostel 1.5 kilometers from the runway, erupting in flames.

The preliminary report by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), released on July 12, revealed a haunting detail from the cockpit voice recorder (CVR): one pilot, believed to be co-pilot Clive Kunder, asked, “Why did you cut off?” to which Captain Sabharwal replied, “I didn’t do it.” The switches were returned to the “run” position seconds later, with Engine 1 relighting but Engine 2 failing to recover thrust. The Ram Air Turbine (RAT), an emergency power source, deployed immediately, but it was too late to prevent the descent. The aircraft struck the hostel nose-up, with debris scattering over 650 feet and five buildings sustaining significant damage. Only one passenger survived, a miracle amidst the devastation.

The Cockpit Camera Leak: A Game-Changer

The newly leaked cockpit camera still, published by The Times of India on July 22, has sent shockwaves through the aviation community. The grainy image, timestamped 13:38:42, shows Captain Sabharwal’s hand extended toward the fuel control switches, located on the central console between the pilots. The switches, designed with a locking mechanism to prevent accidental movement, require a deliberate pull-and-flip motion to shift from “run” to “cutoff.” The image does not show the switches’ position, but its timing aligns with the CVR’s recording of the fuel cutoff and the subsequent pilot exchange. Aviation expert Shawn Pruchnicki, speaking to Newsweek, called the image “disturbing,” noting that “it raises more questions than it answers. Why would a seasoned pilot reach for those switches during climb-out?”

The leak has intensified scrutiny on Sabharwal, a 56-year-old pilot with 15,638 flying hours, including 8,596 on the Boeing 787. Co-pilot Kunder, 32, had 3,403 hours, with 1,128 on the 787. Both passed breathalyzer tests and were deemed fit to fly, having rested adequately in Ahmedabad the day before. The AAIB report confirmed that cockpit controls were in standard takeoff configuration, with flaps extended and landing gear down, ruling out improper settings as a cause. Yet the cockpit camera still, combined with the CVR, suggests a human action—intentional or not—may have triggered the catastrophe.

Theories and Speculation: Error, Malfunction, or Malice?

The cockpit camera evidence has fueled three main theories, each with its own implications:

Pilot Error: The Wall Street Journal, citing unnamed U.S. officials, reported that Sabharwal may have accidentally or deliberately moved the switches, as Kunder, the pilot flying, was focused on controlling the aircraft. The fuel switches’ locking mechanism makes accidental activation unlikely, but not impossible. A 2018 FAA Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin noted that some Boeing 737 fuel switches had disengaged locking features, a design also used in the 787. Air India did not perform recommended inspections, as the bulletin was advisory, not mandatory. Peter Goelz, former NTSB managing director, told the BBC, “This kind of error doesn’t happen without an evident issue. The voice recorder will reveal more.”

Mechanical or Software Glitch: U.S. aviation analyst Mary Schiavo pointed to a 2019 All Nippon Airways incident where a Boeing 787’s software mistakenly shut down an engine mid-flight, suggesting a similar malfunction in Flight 171. The Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) system, which monitors engine performance, could theoretically trigger a cutoff if it receives false sensor data. However, the CVR’s “Why did you cut off?” suggests the pilots observed a physical action, not an automated one. The cockpit camera still further undermines this theory, as it shows Sabharwal’s hand near the switches.

Deliberate Act: The most controversial theory, raised by some U.S. officials in The Wall Street Journal, suggests the possibility of intentional sabotage. The AAIB has strongly rebuked such claims, calling them “irresponsible” and “speculative” without verified evidence. The pilots’ clean records and the absence of any reported distress or conflict in the CVR make this scenario unlikely. Still, the cockpit camera image has prompted calls for a criminal review, particularly in the U.S., where such incidents might involve the FBI.

The Investigation: A Race for Answers

The AAIB, supported by Boeing, GE Aerospace, and experts from the U.S. and U.K., is under pressure to deliver a final report within a year, though complex investigations often take longer. The enhanced airborne flight recorders (EAFRs), recovered on June 13 and 16, have provided critical data, with the front recorder’s data successfully downloaded on June 25. The AAIB is analyzing wreckage, post-mortem reports, and witness statements, while Air India has implemented additional inspections on its 787 fleet, focusing on fuel systems and engine controls.

The cockpit camera, a standard feature on modern Boeing aircraft, offers a visual record that could be pivotal. Unlike the CVR, which captures only audio, the camera provides context for the pilots’ actions. However, Indian authorities have tightly controlled access to the footage, releasing only the single still. “The full video and CVR transcript are crucial,” said U.S. aviation expert John Nance in an NBC News interview. “A lone remark or image isn’t enough to draw conclusions.”

Families of the victims, like Ravi Thakor, who lost his daughter and mother in the crash, are demanding clarity. “The report confuses us,” Thakor told ABC News. “We don’t understand how such a mistake could happen on an international flight. The final report must explain it.” The lack of a full CVR transcript and the selective release of information have frustrated both families and experts, who argue that transparency is essential to restore trust in air safety.

The Broader Context: Boeing and Air India Under Scrutiny

The crash, the first fatal incident involving a Boeing 787 since its 2011 debut, has raised questions about the aircraft’s reliability and Air India’s maintenance practices. Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg, who canceled plans to attend the Paris Air Show to focus on the investigation, said the company is assessing data and supporting the AAIB. GE Aerospace, which manufactured the GEnx-1B engines, is also assisting. Boeing’s stock futures dropped nearly 9% after the crash, reflecting investor concerns about potential design flaws.

Air India, meanwhile, faces scrutiny over its safety protocols. The European Union Aviation Safety Agency is investigating its budget arm, Air India Express, for allegedly falsifying maintenance records on an Airbus A320, raising broader questions about the airline’s compliance with international standards. Air India issued a statement expressing solidarity with the victims’ families and pledging full cooperation with the investigation.

Aviation experts have ruled out other potential causes. CCTV footage showed no significant bird activity, and the crash occurred in clear weather with light winds. The extended slats and flaps, visible in wreckage photos, indicate proper takeoff configuration. The landing gear, still deployed, aligns with the short duration of the flight. A New York Times analysis confirmed the takeoff roll was normal, with no deviation from the aircraft’s previous seven departures from Ahmedabad.

Public Reaction and the Search for Closure

The cockpit camera leak has ignited a firestorm on social media. Posts on X, including one from @jonniegijon, speculated that Sabharwal, described as a “gentle soul,” may have cut the fuel supply, though no evidence supports claims of intent. Another post by @tweets_amit highlighted the AAIB’s blueprint for the final report, expected in at least six months, which will integrate CVR, flight data recorder (FDR), and wreckage analysis. Public sentiment is mixed, with some praising the pilots’ experience and others questioning how such a critical error could occur.

For the families of the 260 victims, the leak offers little comfort. The crash site, a blackened scar on the B.J. Medical College campus, serves as a grim reminder of the lives lost. The deployment of 300 firefighters, 60 fire vehicles, and 20 ambulances underscored the scale of the disaster, with roads closed for hours to facilitate rescue efforts. The sole survivor, a passenger pulled from the wreckage, remains in critical condition, their identity undisclosed.

What Lies Ahead

As the AAIB continues its investigation, the cockpit camera footage remains a focal point. The full video, if released, could clarify whether Sabharwal’s reach for the switches was deliberate, accidental, or prompted by an unseen issue. Experts like Keith Tonkin, speaking to ABC News, emphasize that the switches’ locking mechanism makes accidental movement unlikely, suggesting a conscious act. Yet the CVR’s ambiguity and Schiavo’s warning about software malfunctions keep the door open to multiple scenarios.

The tragedy has also sparked calls for enhanced safety measures. India’s Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) has mandated additional pre-departure checks for Air India’s 787 fleet, focusing on fuel systems and engine controls. The International Federation of Pilots has echoed the AAIB’s call for patience, warning against premature conclusions.

For now, the cockpit camera still stands as a haunting piece of evidence, a snapshot of a moment that changed hundreds of lives. As investigators piece together the puzzle, the world watches, hoping for answers that will honor the victims and prevent such a tragedy from happening again.