Delhi High Court Orders Fresh Framing Of Charges Against Air India Flight Passenger Over Aggressive Behaviour

The Delhi High Court has asked the trial court here to pass fresh order on charge against a man accused of displaying aggressive and abusive behaviour in an Air India flight. The man, Harvey Mann, was also accused of threatening the crew members and repeatedly attempting to open the aircraft door mid- air, proclaiming that he was prepared for “shahadat” and would take everyone along with him.Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma noted that while the prosecution had cited three individuals as witnesses, their statements were not recorded. The Court said that the trial court should have deferred the consideration on charge till the supplementary chargesheet was filed, as the witnesses may have some considerable bearing on the prosecution's case.The Court disposed of Mann's plea challenging the framing of charges against him for the offences under Section 3 of the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against Safety of Civil Aviation Act, 1982, and Sections 427, 506 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. In September, 2022, the Chief Cabin Crew of Air India Flight made a complaint against Mann, alleging that from the very commencement of the flight, he refused to occupy his allocated seat and after take-off, he attempted to open the aircraft door on three occasions in a fit of rage. It was alleged that Mann behaved in a persistently abusive manner towards the uniformed crew members, and had repeatedly threatened them. It was further alleged that he proclaimed that he was there for “Shahadat” and that he would “take everyone along with him.” Mann was also accused of damaging the airline property, including the PTV, remote and armrest. In accordance with the airline‟s SOP, Mann was first orally warned and later, a written warning letter was issued by the Pilot-in-Command. However, since he failed to cooperate, the incident was reported to the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) and other competent authorities for further action, including his enlistment in the “No-Fly List.” Thereafter, FIR was registered against him.Disposing of the plea, the Court noted that when the order on charge came to be passed by the Trial Court, no supplementary chargesheet was filed by the I.O. bringing on record the statements of the said witnesses. It further noted that during the proceedings, the IO conceded that no supplementary report had been filed yet, though the lapse of time since the filing of the main chargesheet was close to three years.The Court remanded the matter back to the Trial Court and asked it to call upon the Investigating Officer to explain why, despite the lapse of more than two and a half years, the supplementary chargesheet has not been filed, and in case the prosecution wishes to file it or not.“Upon receipt of such supplementary material, if any, the learned Trial Court shall thereafter pass an order on charge afresh, after duly considering the additional evidence so brought on record,” the Court said.Title: HARVEY MANN v. THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1095Click here to read order

Delhi High Court Orders Fresh Framing Of Charges Against Air India Flight Passenger Over Aggressive Behaviour

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags