Customs confiscation dispute: interim ship-breaking permission allowed only against bank guarantee and compliance with formalities.

Pending final adjudication of a customs confiscation dispute, interim permission was granted to break the ship only on securing the redemption fine by bank guarantee and completing the required formalities. The record was treated as showing a prima facie basis for provisional confiscation because admissions from the vessel owner's representative suggested that parts had been removed while the vessel remained within the customs area. The explanation that only loose, spare or defective parts had been taken out was not accepted at the interim stage, and the absence of fencing or boundary protection did not displace that prima facie view.

---

---

Issues: Whether, pending final adjudication of the confiscation dispute, the ship could be permitted to be broken on furnishing security, and whether the material on record disclosed a sufficient prima facie basis to sustain the provisional confiscation action under the customs law.

Analysis: The applicant's explanation that only loose spare or defective parts had been removed was not accepted at the interim stage in view of the admissions recorded from its representative. The record suggested that parts had been taken out from the vessel while it remained in the customs area, and the absence of fencing or boundary protection did not negate that position. At the same time, the matter was not finally decided on merits, and the balance of convenience was addressed by securing the redemption fine through a bank guarantee while allowing the ship to be broken, subject to compliance with formalities.

Conclusion: The request for interim permission was allowed conditionally, and the ship was permitted to be broken upon furnishing and maintaining a bank guarantee for the redemption fine, subject to completion of requisite formalities.

---