The Kerala High Court has asked the Centre to consider whether the Indian Navy's deep-sea salvage expertise could be deployed to inspect the wreckage of the sunken MSC Elsa 3 and determine whether it poses any environmental or navigational risks.

A Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice K V Jayakumar directed the Additional Solicitor General of India (ASGI) to obtain instructions from the Ministry of Defence on whether the Navy's services could be utilised to ascertain the condition of the wreck lying on the seabed and assess any environmental risks arising from it.

The court was hearing a batch of public interest litigations concerning the environmental, navigational and livelihood issues arising from the sinking of the Liberian-flagged vessel off the Kerala coast on May 25, 2025.

The Bench noted that the report of the Amicus Curiae referred to the Indian Navy's expertise in deep-sea salvage operations, including the use of remotely operated vehicles (ROVs), and its experience in conducting complex salvage and pollution response operations. It also took note of the commissioning of INS Nistar, an indigenously designed Diving Support Vessel meant for deep-sea diving, rescue and salvage operations.

"The learned ASG shall get instructions from the Ministry of Defence as to whether the services of the Navy can be employed to ascertain whether any wreck lying on the seabed poses any environmental risks," the court said.

The Bench observed that reports submitted by maritime agencies and consultants engaged by the ship owner, Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC), had concluded that the wreck posed no environmental or navigational threat. However, it reiterated that those reports alone could not be relied upon and that an independent assessment was necessary to verify the findings.

During the hearing, the ASGI informed the court that the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, the Directorate General of Shipping and other central agencies had convened a meeting to deliberate on the environmental issues highlighted in the Court's earlier interim order. It was also submitted that the National Institute of Oceanography (NIO) is expected to submit its report by July 30, following which a field study could be undertaken, if necessary.

The court, however, emphasised that the wreck itself needed to be inspected. It questioned whether any agency had physically examined the wreck on the seabed to determine its condition and the extent of any damage.

The Bench also referred to reports indicating that several hazardous cargo containers remain within the wreck, including those carrying International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG), calcium carbide and plastic nurdles, and observed that their condition required independent verification.

The ASGI submitted that the nature of any further study would depend on the findings of the NIO report.

The court, however, observed that the NIO's study, which appeared to focus on environmental damage assessment, might not by itself be sufficient to determine whether the findings of the consultants engaged by the ship owner could be accepted. It said an independent expert agency or scientific consultant should be engaged to verify those findings.

The matter has been posted to August 11 for further consideration. The court also directed the respondents to file independent counter-affidavits.
(With LiveLaw updates)