Kerala High Court Seeks Report on Delay in MSC Elsa 3 Casualty Investigation

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas directed the court registry to obtain instructions from the Magistrate on the reasons for the delay in commencing the investigation following the receipt of the formal application under the Merchant Shipping Act on September 30, 2025. The High Court also sought details of the proceedings undertaken so far, the expected timeline for completion of the investigation, and whether the examination of crew members could be advanced. The directions came while hearing a petition filed by seven crew members of the vessel who have remained in India for over a year following the maritime casualty.

During the hearing, the State informed the Court that a final report had already been submitted on May 30 in the criminal case registered by the Coastal Police against four of the petitioners, and that summons would soon be issued. The Court directed authorities to provide details on whether cognizance had been taken in Crime No. 14/2025 of the Coastal Police Station and the dates fixed for the appearance of the accused. Expressing concern over the prolonged investigation, Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas observed that while the incident was an accident that may at most involve allegations of negligence, it did not justify keeping the crew members in the country indefinitely. The Court noted that authorities had taken more than a year to complete the investigation.

The Court further pointed out that the Merchant Shipping Act prescribes timelines for casualty investigations, including submission of an interim report within 30 days and a preliminary inquiry report within 90 days, with any delays required to be formally explained to the Directorate General of Shipping.

Highlighting the impact on the crew members’ rights, the Court observed that prolonged delays in investigation could affect the right to a fair trial. The judge questioned why the crew should continue to remain in India when alternative arrangements such as video conferencing could facilitate their participation in proceedings. The Court noted that only two of the petitioners have been named in the formal investigation, while the remaining crew members may only be required as witnesses. It suggested that witness testimony could be recorded through virtual means and that suitable conditions could be imposed to ensure the presence of those directly involved whenever required.

Drawing a comparison with Indian citizens facing criminal proceedings who are often permitted to travel abroad subject to conditions, the Court observed that individuals should not be compelled to remain in the country for years solely because investigations are pending.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas indicated that he was inclined to grant relief to petitioners 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7, who are not named in the formal investigation. As regards petitioners 1 and 3, the Court decided to await a report from the Magistrate on the possibility of expediting their examination and the completion of the investigation.The matter was posted for further hearing on June 9, when the Court is expected to consider the Magistrate’s report and pass further orders on the plea.

The petitioners were represented by Senior Advocate Grashious Kuriakose along with a team of advocates, while Additional Solicitor General P. Sreekumar appeared for the Union Government, the Directorate General of Shipping, and the Mercantile Marine Department.