Court rules owners not liable for crew penalties if unaware of contraband; refund ordered.

The court ruled in favor of the petitioners in a case involving a penalty imposed on a vessel's Second Officer for contraband material found on board. The court held that the petitioners, as owners, should not be liable for penalties on crew members if they were unaware of the contraband. The petitioners successfully argued that they should not be held responsible for penalties based on a bond obtained under duress. The court found that the respondents could not recover the penalty from the petitioners and ordered a refund of the deposited amount in place of the bank guarantee.

---

---

Issues:
Petition seeking injunction against penalty recovery from vessel's Second Officer, Bond requirement for release of vessel, Liability of petitioners for penalty on Second Officer, Enforcement of bond against petitioners for penalty on crew member.

Analysis:
1. The petitioners sought an injunction to prevent the recovery of a penalty imposed on the Second Officer of a vessel and to stop the encashment of a bank guarantee. The vessel was detained after contraband material was found on board. The petitioners argued they should not be liable for penalties imposed on crew members. The Collector's order stated that the Second Officer alone was liable for the penalty, absolving the owner and Master of the vessel.

2. The respondents contended that the petitioners were bound by a bond to pay fines or penalties imposed on them or any crew member. The bond was considered an independent contract with Customs Authorities. However, the petitioners argued that the bond was obtained under duress, and they should not be held responsible for penalties on crew members, citing a previous court decision.

3. Referring to a prior case, the court highlighted that if contraband goods were brought on board without the owner or Master's knowledge, the owners should not be held liable for penalties on crew members. The petitioners relied on this decision, stating they executed the bond believing they would not be responsible for penalties on crew members.

4. The court found in favor of the petitioners, stating that the respondents could not recover the penalty from them based on the bond. The petitioners were entitled to a refund of the deposited amount in lieu of the bank guarantee. The Rule was made absolute, and the refund was ordered upon production of a certified copy of the judgment.

---