MADURAI: The 35 crew members of a private US Ship, who were arrested on charges of carrying weapons illegally and straying into Indian waters, today filed a fresh bail application at the Madras High court bench here, saying they were languishing in jail, and two months had elapsed after the filing of charge-sheet.
The crew of M V Seaman Guard Ohio were arrested by Tamil Nadu Police after the ship was intercepted by Coast Guard on October 18 last year. They were booked under the Arms Act and also the Essential Commodities Act for “illegal” purchase of diesel from local agents.
The crew members, include 12 Indians.
In their bail application, the crew said most of them had developed physical ailments, and alleged that they were being subjected to mental harassment and emotional trauma.
Their medical reports proved that their health had been adversely affected and they had lost many pounds due to lack of proper food and other amenities.
Their continued judicial custody was a blatant violation of their Human rights and was contrary to Union of India’s treaty obligations in the Maritime as well as in the foreign relations sector, the bail application said.
Even according to the charge-sheet only Radesh Dhar Dwivedi and Sidorenko Valeriy (Chief Engineer) were mainly responsible for the control over administration of the vessel.
Thirty-one accused in the case were only occupants of the ship, the application said.
There was no prima facie case made out against the accused. The laws invoked were also not applicable to the petitioners, it was contended.
The application said the charge-sheet was filed and investigation had been completed. The antecedents and track records of the accused were relevant to prove their integrity and bonafides. There need not be any apprehension that they would avoid the processes of the court, it was submitted.
The petition is likely to be taken up on Monday.
The bench had dismissed their bail pleas earlier on December 18.
On February 13, ‘Q’-branch inspector and investigation officer R D Baskaran had filed his detailed counter.
He argued that the captain of the vessel failed to produce the necessary documents, though he had agreed to produce them in one hour.
Besides, there was no response from the ship company though e-mail request to submit papers was made.–PTI
