Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings in Enrica Lexie Case, Awards Compensation (15 June 2021)

Date of the Judgment: 15 June 2021

Citation: (Not Available)

Judges: Hon’ble Ms. Justice Indira Banerjee, Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.R. Shah (Vacation Bench)

Can a long-standing international dispute involving a criminal case be resolved through compensation and international arbitration? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in the case of Massimilano Latorre and others vs. Union of India and others, concerning the unfortunate incident of the Enrica Lexie. This case involved the killing of two Indian fishermen by Italian marines, leading to a complex legal battle involving criminal proceedings and international law. The Supreme Court, in its judgment, focused on bringing the matter to a close by accepting the compensation awarded by an international tribunal and quashing the criminal proceedings in India. The judgment was delivered by a vacation bench comprising Hon’ble Ms. Justice Indira Banerjee and Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.R. Shah.

Case Background

On 15th February 2012, two Indian fishermen, Valantine @ Jelestine and Ajeesh Pink, were killed when their boat, “St. Antony,” was fired upon by personnel from the Italian vessel “M.V. Enrica Lexie” off the coast of Kerala. The vessel was en route from Singapore to Egypt. An FIR, Crime No. 2 of 2012, was registered against two Italian marines, Massimilano Latorre and Salvatore Girone, for offences including murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The two marines were apprehended and produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kollam. The Republic of Italy made an ex-gratia payment to the families of the deceased in April 2012. The vessel was later allowed to sail away under certain conditions by the Supreme Court. A chargesheet was filed against the two marines on 18th May 2012 for offences under Sections 302, 307, 427, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3 of the Suppression of Unlawful Activities Act. The case was committed to the Sessions Court, Kollam. The High Court of Kerala dismissed a writ petition challenging the jurisdiction of the State of Kerala in the matter.

Timeline

Course of Proceedings

The High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam dismissed Writ Petition No. 4542 of 2012, upholding the jurisdiction of the State of Kerala and the concerned Circle Inspector of Police at Kollam. The petitioners then filed a special leave petition before the Supreme Court. The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) ordered the suspension of all court proceedings, which was followed by the Supreme Court’s order to stay proceedings. The Arbitral Tribunal constituted under Annex VII of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) delivered its award on 21st May 2020. The Republic of Italy committed to resuming its criminal investigation and agreed to pay INR 100 million as compensation, excluding the amount already paid. The Union of India filed an application to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the award. The Republic of Italy deposited the compensation amount, which was then transferred to the Supreme Court registry. The heirs of the deceased and the owner of the boat agreed to the compensation proposal.

Legal Framework

The case involves the interpretation and application of several legal provisions:

• Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860: This section defines the punishment for murder.
• Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860: This section defines the punishment for attempt to murder.
• Section 427 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860: This section defines the punishment for mischief causing damage.
• Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860: This section deals with acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention.
• Section 3 of the Suppression of Unlawful Activities Act: This section deals with acts against the safety of maritime navigation.
• Article 142 of the Constitution of India: This article grants the Supreme Court the power to pass any order necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it.
• United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS): This international treaty establishes a legal framework for all marine and maritime activities.

Arguments

The petitioners, including the Italian marines and the Republic of Italy, argued that the dispute should be resolved under the dispute resolution mechanism of the UNCLOS. They emphasized that both India and Italy had ratified the UNCLOS and were bound by its provisions. The Republic of Italy agreed to pay compensation as determined by the Arbitral Tribunal. The Union of India supported the implementation of the Arbitral Tribunal’s award. The State of Kerala and the heirs of the deceased also agreed to accept the compensation. The main contention was that the criminal proceedings in India should be quashed in light of the compensation and the commitment of Italy to resume its own criminal investigation.

The arguments can be categorized as follows:

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court did not explicitly frame issues in the judgment. However, the core issue was:

1. Whether the criminal proceedings in India should be quashed in light of the compensation awarded by the Arbitral Tribunal and the commitment of Italy to resume its own criminal investigation.

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

The following table demonstrates as to how the Court decided the issues

Authorities

The Supreme Court considered the following authorities:

• 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS): The court noted that both India and Italy were signatories to this convention and agreed to settle the dispute under its dispute resolution mechanism.

Authorities Considered by the Court

Judgment

The Supreme Court, exercising its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, closed the proceedings and quashed the criminal proceedings in India. The Court directed the transfer of the compensation amount to the High Court of Kerala for disbursement to the heirs of the deceased and the owner of the boat. The Court also directed the Republic of Italy to resume its criminal investigation and for India, Italy and Kerala to cooperate in the investigation. The Court also discharged the bail bonds and released the bank guarantees.

The Court also considered the following authorities:

• 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS): The Court noted that the dispute resolution mechanism under UNCLOS was binding on both India and Italy.

The Court observed that the compensation of Rs. Ten Crores, in addition to the ex-gratia payment, was a reasonable amount. The court also took into account the fact that the long-drawn proceedings were coming to an end. The Court noted that the Republic of Italy had agreed to resume its criminal investigation into the incident.

The Supreme Court quoted the following from the judgment:

“…we are satisfied that the amount of compensation of Rs. Ten Crores over and above the ex-gratia amount of compensation already paid to the heirs of the deceased fishermen offered and deposited by the Republic of Italy, deposited pursuant to award dated 21.05.2020 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal can be said to be a reasonable amount of compensation and can be said to be in the interest of heirs of the deceased, we are of the view that this is a fit case to close all the proceedings in India including criminal proceedings in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India.”

“…now the Republic of Italy shall resume its criminal investigation in the events of 15.02.2012 and it is further directed that the Union of India, Republic of Italy and the State of Kerala shall cooperate with each other in pursuit of that investigation.”

“…we dispose of/close the present proceedings by directing as under: (a) FIR No.2/2012 of Coastal PS, Neendakara, Kollam, Kerala re-registered as FIR No. R.C. No. 04/2013/NIA/DLI dated 4 April 2013, under Sections 302, 307, 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3 of the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against Safety of Maritime Navigation and Fixed Platforms on Continental Shelf Act, 2002 registered by the National Investigation Agency, New Delhi, and all proceedings emanating therefrom including the proceedings pending before the Ld. Special Designated Court, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi are hereby quashed;”

What weighed in the mind of the Court?

The Supreme Court’s decision was primarily influenced by the acceptance of the Arbitral Tribunal’s award by all parties involved and the commitment of the Republic of Italy to resume its criminal investigation. The Court emphasized the need to bring the long-standing dispute to a close and ensure that the compensation reaches the families of the deceased without delay. The Court also considered the fact that the amount of compensation was reasonable and in the interest of the heirs of the deceased.

Key Takeaways

• The Supreme Court quashed the criminal proceedings against the Italian marines in India.
• The Republic of Italy will resume its criminal investigation into the incident.
• The heirs of the deceased fishermen will receive a compensation of Rs. Four Crores each.
• The owner of the boat will receive a compensation of Rs. Two Crores.
• The case highlights the importance of international arbitration in resolving complex international disputes.

Directions

The Supreme Court issued the following directions:

• FIR No.2/2012 of Coastal PS, Neendakara, Kollam, Kerala re-registered as FIR No. R.C. No. 04/2013/NIA/DLI dated 4 April 2013, under Sections 302, 307, 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3 of the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against Safety of Maritime Navigation and Fixed Platforms on Continental Shelf Act, 2002 registered by the National Investigation Agency, New Delhi, and all proceedings emanating therefrom including the proceedings pending before the Ld. Special Designated Court, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi are hereby quashed.
• The Bail-Bonds dated 2 June 2012 executed by Chief Master Sergeant Massimiliano Latorre and Sergeant Major Salvatore Girone as also Mr. Vishal Talwar and Mr. Vikas Talwar who stood as Sureties, in connection with the aforementioned FIR before the Ld. Special Designated Court, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi and the Ld. Registrar General of this Court are hereby discharged.
• The Ld. Registrar General of this Court shall release the original Bank Guarantees bearing Nos.0071IGFIN000618 and 0071IGFIN000418, both dated 11 June 2018 for Rs. Two Crores each, issued by the UCO Bank, Kollam Branch, extended through Letters of Extension Nos. UCO/KOLLAM/BG/02/2020-21 and UCO/KOLLAM/BG/01/2020-21 dated 28 May 2020, given on behalf of the two Sureties, Mr. Vikas Talwar and Mr. Vishal Talwar.
• All pending matters before this Hon’ble Court including (1) the Special Leave Petition (C) No. 20370 of 2012, (2) Writ Petition (C) No. 236 of 2014, (3) Writ Petition (C) No. 919 of 2014 and all pending I.As in the said proceedings are disposed of with no order as to costs.
• The Republic of Italy shall resume its criminal investigation in the events of 15.02.2012 and it is further directed that the Union of India, Republic of Italy and the State of Kerala shall cooperate with each other in pursuit of that investigation.
• The amount of Rs. Ten Crores now lying with the Registry of this Court be transferred to the High Court of Kerala, out of which Rupees Four Crores be paid to the heirs of each deceased and Rs. Two crores be paid to the owner of the boat – St. Antony.
• The Hon’ble Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court is requested to nominate a Judge to pass appropriate order of disbursement/investment of the amount to be paid to the heirs of each deceased (Rupees Four Crores each) so as to protect the interest of the heirs and ensure that the compensation is duly received by the heirs and not diverted/misappropriated.
• The remaining amount of Rs. Two Crores be paid to the owner of the boat – St. Antony by an account payee cheque.

Development of Law

The Supreme Court’s decision in this case highlights the importance of international law and arbitration in resolving complex international disputes. The Court’s willingness to accept the award of the Arbitral Tribunal and close the criminal proceedings in India demonstrates a pragmatic approach to resolving such matters. The case also reinforces the importance of Article 142 of the Constitution of India, which allows the Supreme Court to pass orders necessary for doing complete justice.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s judgment in the Enrica Lexie case brings a long-standing international dispute to a close. By accepting the compensation awarded by the Arbitral Tribunal and quashing the criminal proceedings in India, the Court has prioritized the interests of the victims and their families while respecting international legal mechanisms. The decision underscores the importance of international cooperation and arbitration in resolving complex legal issues involving multiple jurisdictions.