JUDGMENT

R.M. Lodha, J.-Leave granted.

2. We have heard Mr. K.K. Venugopal, learned senior counsel for the appellants, Mr. Goolam E. Vahanvati, learned Attorney General of India for respondent No. 6, and Mr. Gopal Subramaniam, learned senior counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 3. Despite service, respondent No. 1 has not chosen to appear.

3. The vessel – M.T. Enrica Lexie – and M/s Dolphin Tanker SRL (owner of the vessel) are in appeal aggrieved by the order passed by the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court on April 3, 2012 whereby the Division Bench set aside the judgment and order of the Single Judge dated March 29, 2012.

4. The controversy arises in this way. On February 15, 2012 an First Information Report (FIR) was lodged at Neendakara Coastal Police Station by one Fredy, owner of the Indian registered fishing boat St. Antony. It was alleged in the FIR that at 4.30 p.m. (IST) on that day while the fishing boat St. Antony was sailing through the Arabian Sea, incriminate firing was opened by an Italian Ship - M.T. Enrica Lexie (first appellant). As a result of firing from the first appellant vessel, two innocent fishermen who were on board the fishing boat St. Antony died and the other occupants of the boat saved their lives as they were lying in reclining position on the deck of the boat. On the basis of FIR, Crime No. 2/2012 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, (IPC) was registered. Neendakara Coastal Police Station also informed the matter to the Coast Guards and, accordingly, the first appellant vessel was intercepted and brought to the Port of Cochin on February 16, 2012. Two Marines who allegedly committed the offence were arrested on February 19, 2012.

5. It is not necessary to go into details of the investigation into the above crime. Suffice it to say that on February 26, 2012, the concerned Circle Inspector of Police issued a letter to the Master of the first appellant vessel directing that the vessel shall not continue her voyage without his prior sanction.

6. The stand of the first appellant is that she was on way from Singapore to Egypt having 24 crew members on board. The vessel also had on board six Marines personnel, i.e., Naval Military Protection Squad (NMP Squad). The NMP Squad was deployed on board the first appellant vessel by the Government of Republic of Italy due to severe threat of Somalian pirates in the Arabian Sea. The second appellant - owner of the vessel – is a member of the Italian Ship Owner’s Confederation. The NMP Squad was on board to ensure efficient protection to the vessel because of piracy and armed plundering as per the agreement between the Ministry of Defence Naval Staff and the Italian Ship Owner’s Confederation. The Master of the ship is in no way responsible for choices relating to operations involved in countering piracy attacks, if any; the Master of the ship cannot interfere with the military activities undertaken by the NMP Squad for the defence of the vessel, its crew and cargo in the face of pirate attacks and the NMP Squad on board the vessel is always under the direct command of the military of Republic of Italy.

7. According to the appellants, although all the agencies had completed their respective investigations, none of them were giving official clearance for the vessel to sail and that necessitated them to file a Writ Petition before the High Court of Kerala for appropriate directions and permission to the first appellant vessel for sailing and proceeding with her voyage.

8. In response to the Writ Petition, counter affidavit was filed by the Circle Inspector. The Single Judge, after hearing the parties, allowed the Writ Petition filed by the appellants, issued a writ of mandamus directing the present respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to allow the first appellant vessel to commence her voyage on certain conditions.

9. Being not satisfied with the judgment and order of the Single Judge dated March 29, 2012, Doramma (wife of one of the deceased fishermen), int