Maritime Vigilance: Securing the Bay of Bengal

The Seizure at the International Maritime Boundary Line

The recent action by the Indian Coast Guard (ICG) to apprehend three Bangladeshi Fishing Boats (BFBs) and their 79 crew members for illegal fishing inside India’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in the Northern Bay of Bengal highlights the perpetual, high-stakes maritime security challenge faced by littoral states. This specific incident, occurring during routine International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL) surveillance operations on November 15 and 16, 2025, underscores the critical role of the ICG as the principal agency for enforcing national maritime laws and protecting sovereign resources. The interception, which occurred "well within Indian waters," was executed due to a clear violation of the Maritime Zones of India (Regulation of Fishing by Foreign Vessels) Act, 1981. Upon boarding and inspection, the ICG teams confirmed active illegal activity through the discovery of fishing gear and freshly caught fish, and the crew members’ inability to produce valid fishing permits. The sheer number of individuals apprehended 79 fishermen across three vessels points not to opportunistic isolated incursions, but to organised, resource-driven illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing operations. The subsequent handover of the vessels and crew to the Marine Police at Frazerganj initiates a complex legal and diplomatic process. This event is far more than a simple law enforcement action; it is a flashpoint revealing deep-seated issues concerning shared marine resource depletion, the economic desperation of marginalized fishing communities, the geopolitical importance of IMBL demarcation, and the delicate balance required in the bilateral relationship between India and Bangladesh to ensure both maritime security and humanitarian considerations are addressed effectively.

Legal Framework: Defining the Exclusive Economic Zone and IMBL Violation

The legal foundation for the ICG’s action rests firmly on the principles enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), 1982, to which both India and Bangladesh are signatories, and the subsequent Maritime Zones of India (Regulation of Fishing by Foreign Vessels) Act, 1981. The core of the violation is the illegal entry and exploitation of resources within India’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). The EEZ is a maritime area extending up to 200 nautical miles from the coastal baselines. Within this zone, India exercises sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring and exploiting, conserving, and managing natural resources, whether living or non-living, of the seabed and subsoil and the superjacent waters. Crucially, while foreign vessels enjoy the freedom of navigation and overflight in the EEZ (as it is not sovereign territory), they absolutely do not have the right to fish or exploit resources without explicit permission, which must be obtained from the Government of India, usually through a valid permit or license. The BFBs were detected operating "well within Indian waters," meaning they were not merely drifting but were actively engaged in fishing inside this 200-nautical-mile limit, thereby directly infringing upon India's sovereign economic rights over its marine wealth.

The enforcement operation occurred near the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL) in the Northern Bay of Bengal. This line represents the definitive maritime border agreed upon by India and Bangladesh following the resolution of their long-standing maritime boundary dispute by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in 2014, which awarded India 19,467 sq km of the 25,602 sq km area in dispute. This clear demarcation is essential because it eliminates the ambiguity that previously complicated enforcement and allowed foreign vessels to claim accidental transgression. The ICG patrols are specifically mandated to carry out surveillance along this boundary to prevent deliberate incursions. The Maritime Zones of India Act, 1981, provides the statutory teeth for the ICG's actions. Section 3 of this Act prohibits foreign vessels from engaging in fishing or related activities in India's territorial waters or EEZ unless they possess a license or letter of authority granted under the Act. Violations under this Act carry severe penalties, including seizure and forfeiture of the vessel, fishing gear, and catch, along with substantial fines and imprisonment for the crew. The ICG’s documented process of interception, boarding, inspection, and verification of permits (or lack thereof) is the legally mandated procedure for gathering irrefutable evidence under this Act. The absence of valid permits for all 79 crew members across the three vessels confirms the violation and transitions the issue from a diplomatic anomaly to a clear case of economic crime, enforceable by the Indian state authorities.

The ICG’s Mandate and Advanced Surveillance Operations

The successful apprehension of the three Bangladeshi fishing boats (BFBs) is a direct reflection of the Indian Coast Guard's (ICG) multifaceted mandate and its continuous investment in advanced surveillance and enforcement capabilities along the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL). The ICG functions as the nation’s primary maritime law enforcement agency, adhering to the triple objective of Safety, Security, and Environmental Protection in the maritime zones of India. Security operations along the IMBL, particularly in the resource-rich but highly sensitive Northern Bay of Bengal, are a perpetual requirement to safeguard the sovereign rights over the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). The ICG maintains a posture of continuous surface and aerial surveillance to create a layered defense system against Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing, which poses a significant threat to national economic security and marine ecology.

The operational backbone of this surveillance includes the use of maritime patrol aircraft and advanced offshore patrol vessels (OPVs). The ICG deploys its Dornier 228 maritime surveillance aircraft for aerial reconnaissance, capable of covering vast tracts of the EEZ rapidly and identifying suspicious vessel movements, particularly those operating without transmitting their Automatic Identification System (AIS) signals. The aerial patrols are crucial for initial detection. Once a suspicious pattern of life or a clear violation is detected, the information is relayed to surface assets, primarily OPVs and Fast Patrol Vessels (FPVs). These vessels are equipped with sophisticated surface search radar, electro-optical/infrared (EO/IR) surveillance systems, and high-speed interception craft. The use of modern technology allows the ICG to establish the precise coordinates of the violation, gathering irrefutable evidence that the BFBs were operating "well within Indian waters," a critical component for subsequent legal prosecution. The successful interception involved a sequence of highly trained maritime procedures: first, the detection and identification of the vessel based on its size, configuration, and activity pattern (such as deployment of nets); second, warning and hot pursuit if necessary; third, interception and tactical boarding by specialized teams to ensure crew safety and compliance; and finally, inspection and documentation to confirm the absence of permits and the presence of fresh catch and gear.

Continuous vigilance is crucial because the IMBL in the Bay of Bengal is long and often traversed by vessels aiming to exploit the rich fishing grounds that periodically shift across the demarcation line. The ICG's stated commitment to maintaining this sustained effort underscores a clear strategy: making the cost and risk of illegal incursions prohibitively high to deter future violations. Furthermore, the ICG’s mandate extends to ensuring the safety of Indian fishermen, whose legitimate livelihoods are threatened by foreign IUU fishing. By policing the EEZ, the ICG secures the marine commons for domestic use, thereby protecting local economic interests. The operation is thus a critical demonstration of the ICG's capability to project authority and enforce the law consistently throughout India's vast maritime domain.

The Economic Drivers of Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing

Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing, as demonstrated by the apprehension of the 79 Bangladeshi fishermen, is primarily driven by powerful economic and demographic pressures that transcend simple criminal intent. The root cause lies in the severe resource depletion and environmental degradation in the coastal waters of Bangladesh, pushing small-scale fishing communities across the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL) into India’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in search of viable catch. The Northern Bay of Bengal is a shared ecosystem, but intense and often unsustainable fishing practices on the Bangladeshi side have dramatically reduced near-shore fish stocks, making incursions into the deeper, better-conserved Indian EEZ an economic necessity for survival.

The fishing sector in Bangladesh is characterized by a high number of traditional, low-technology vessels and a large coastal population dependent on marine capture for their primary income. As stocks decline, competition intensifies, forcing fishermen to venture further out to sea and risk crossing the international border. For these 79 crew members, the decision to enter Indian waters was likely a calculated risk based on the potential for a substantial catch, which could mean the difference between economic survival and destitution for their families. The high number of fishermen per boat (averaging over 26 per vessel in this incident) suggests that the boats are maximizing manpower to haul larger, heavier nets, a common practice indicative of the competitive pressure to catch as much as possible, regardless of legality. This economic desperation is often exploited by organised elements within the fishing industry, who finance and equip the vessels with advanced gear (such as bottom trawlers or fine-mesh nets, often illegal) and provide minimal navigation equipment, effectively pushing vulnerable fishermen into dangerous, high-risk operations with limited training or awareness of the exact IMBL demarcation. The profits from these IUU operations, however, often accrue to the boat owners and financiers, not the individual fishermen.

The global cost of IUU fishing is estimated to run into billions of dollars annually, representing a massive loss of sovereign economic value. For India, the illegal harvesting of resources within its EEZ threatens the sustainability of its own fisheries and national food security. Furthermore, IUU fishing undermines efforts by both nations to implement sustainable fisheries management plans, as the "unreported" nature of the catch makes accurate stock assessment impossible. This negative feedback loop where depletion drives illegal activity, which, in turn, accelerates further depletion is the fundamental economic driver of the problem. The solution, therefore, requires not just law enforcement, but coordinated bilateral efforts to boost sustainable fishing practices, enforce regulations on vessel ownership, and provide alternative livelihoods for coastal communities in Bangladesh, thereby reducing the irresistible economic pull across the maritime boundary.

Human and Humanitarian Dimensions of Apprehension

Behind the statistics of three boats and 79 crew members lies a significant human and humanitarian dimension that requires careful consideration in the context of bilateral relations and law enforcement. The fishermen apprehended are predominantly poor, marginalized individuals from coastal communities, often lacking formal education, possessing rudimentary navigation skills, and motivated by economic hardship rather than deliberate antagonism toward the Indian state. The high number of individuals per vessel (a total of 79 divided by three boats) suggests a communal dependence on the yield of each trip. Their apprehension immediately triggers a complex chain of humanitarian and diplomatic concerns, particularly regarding their well-being during custody and the process of repatriation.

The process of apprehension itself involving the swift interception, boarding, and inspection by the heavily armed and trained ICG personnel is inherently stressful and potentially dangerous, even when non-lethal. The fishermen, operating small, traditional boats, are likely terrified of the encounter, fearing the confiscation of their only livelihood (the boat and gear) and facing an uncertain legal future. After the apprehension, the ICG’s protocol requires the escort of the vessels and crew to the nearest designated port, in this case, Frazerganj in West Bengal. During the transit, the ICG is responsible for the humanitarian care of the crew, including providing food, water, and necessary medical attention, consistent with international maritime law and humanitarian principles. Upon arrival, the custody is transferred to the Marine Police for legal action.

The subsequent challenge lies in the legal and custodial phase. These fishermen often lack legal representation, do not speak the local language or Hindi proficiently, and have no immediate contact with their families or diplomatic representation. Detention and legal processing can be lengthy, especially given the complexities of inter-state and international maritime crime legislation. Humanitarian groups and diplomatic missions often intervene to ensure that the fishermen are not subjected to prolonged, undue detention. The diplomatic framework between India and Bangladesh typically involves a structured, reciprocal process for the release and repatriation of detained fishermen, often executed through coordinated transfers at the IMBL. However, until that diplomatic resolution is achieved, the 79 individuals remain in legal limbo, dependent on the efficiency and fairness of the Indian judicial system and the humaneness of the custodial process. This human cost of IUU fishing the separation of families, the loss of livelihoods, and the trauma of legal detention serves as a constant, sobering reminder that law enforcement actions must be balanced with compassionate handling, particularly for individuals caught between resource scarcity and international boundaries.

Diplomatic and Bilateral Relations between India and Bangladesh

The issue of illegal fishing is a persistent, low-level irritant in the otherwise robust and strategic bilateral relationship between India and Bangladesh. While the two nations share deep historical, cultural, and trade ties, maritime transgressions frequently test the mechanisms of diplomatic cooperation. The apprehension of three boats and 79 fishermen triggers an immediate diplomatic protocol, requiring coordinated action between the Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), the High Commission of Bangladesh in India, and their respective security and maritime agencies. The issue is viewed through a lens of balancing strict sovereign enforcement with the maintenance of good neighborly relations.

Following any major apprehension, Bangladesh typically raises the issue through diplomatic channels, often stressing the humanitarian aspect the poverty and lack of awareness of the fishermen while implicitly acknowledging the violation of the Maritime Zones of India Act, 1981. India, in turn, uses the incident to underscore the necessity of respecting the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL), which was meticulously demarcated following the 2014 ITLOS ruling. The primary diplomatic mechanisms used to manage this recurring issue include:

Flag Meetings and Joint Coastal Patrols: Security agencies from both sides, particularly the ICG and the Bangladesh Coast Guard (BCG), often conduct flag meetings at sea or along the border to share intelligence, discuss operational protocols, and manage border incidents. Joint patrols are sometimes undertaken to deter IUU fishing and maintain a cooperative security environment.
Repatriation Protocols: A streamlined process exists for the release and repatriation of detained fishermen, often involving the exchange of lists of arrested individuals and coordinated handover at the IMBL, sometimes following a period of detention and legal proceedings. Recent years have seen greater speed in these processes, indicating improved diplomatic trust.
Bilateral Consultations on Fisheries: Official-level talks are periodically held to address the root causes of the problem, including resource management, the sharing of scientific data on fish stocks, and agreements on sustainable fishing practices or regulated access to certain zones, though the latter remains a highly sensitive and rarely executed proposition.

However, the issue remains politically sensitive. In India, it is often linked to the broader challenge of coastal security and sovereignty enforcement, particularly in the border state of West Bengal. In Bangladesh, the issue is tied to poverty alleviation and the protection of the traditional fishing community. The diplomatic handling must, therefore, be nuanced: rigorous law enforcement is essential to maintain sovereign credibility, but the prompt and humane repatriation of the fishermen is equally vital to prevent the issue from escalating into a diplomatic crisis. The apprehension of 79 people is a large-scale event that requires high-level political engagement to ensure that the shared strategic goals of both nations maritime security, regional stability, and economic cooperation are not undermined by isolated incidents of resource desperation and border violation.

The Environmental and Ecological Impact of IUU Fishing

The illegal fishing activities intercepted by the ICG near the IMBL pose a severe and often irreversible threat to the environmental and ecological integrity of the Bay of Bengal, extending far beyond the immediate economic loss of fish stocks. This dimension is central to the ICG’s mandate for environmental protection and justifies the strong enforcement action. Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing practices are inherently destructive because they disregard conservation measures, season restrictions, and gear regulations designed to maintain marine biodiversity and ecosystem health.

One of the most damaging aspects of IUU fishing is the use of illegal fishing gear, such as fine-mesh nets or certain types of bottom trawlers. Fine-mesh nets indiscriminately capture juvenile fish and non-target species (known as bycatch), preventing the fish population from reaching reproductive maturity and fundamentally disrupting the marine food chain. Over time, this leads to the collapse of commercial fish stocks and a significant reduction in marine biomass. Bottom trawlers, which are dragged across the seabed, physically destroy sensitive marine habitats, including coral beds, sponge gardens, and essential nursery grounds for numerous species. The recovery of such habitats can take decades, if not centuries. The Bay of Bengal, which is already under stress from climate change, industrial pollution, and coastal development, cannot withstand the additional pressure of these destructive, unregulated fishing methods.

Furthermore, the unreported nature of the catch complicates the scientific modeling required for effective fisheries management in both India and Bangladesh. Without accurate data on what is being removed from the sea, conservationists and policymakers cannot establish scientifically sound quotas or spatial restrictions, leading to continuous overestimation of available stocks and a downward spiral of depletion. This long-term ecological damage threatens the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of legitimate, regulated fishermen in both nations who adhere to sustainable practices. For India, protecting its EEZ is not just about securing national assets but about conserving vital marine ecosystems that contribute to global biodiversity. The ICG's interception, which found evidence of "freshly caught fish," confirms the immediate ecological damage being perpetrated by these vessels. This environmental enforcement is a core defense mechanism against the tragedy of the commons, where short-term economic gains from IUU fishing lead to long-term ecological ruin for all users of the Bay of Bengal. International and bilateral cooperation is urgently required to standardize gear and conservation protocols across the entire Bay to prevent irreparable harm to this shared marine environment.

Legal Proceedings and the Fate of the Crew and Vessels

Following the apprehension, the fate of the three Bangladeshi fishing boats and their 79 crew members is now subject to the rigorous legal and judicial process defined by Indian maritime law, specifically the Maritime Zones of India (Regulation of Fishing by Foreign Vessels) Act, 1981, and the relevant criminal procedure codes. The entire operation transitioned from a sea-based enforcement action to a land-based criminal investigation when the ICG successfully escorted and handed over the boats and crew to the Marine Police at Frazerganj.

The Marine Police, which is part of the West Bengal Police Coastal Security Scheme, takes immediate custody of the personnel and the seized assets. Their primary role is to register a First Information Report (FIR) under the relevant sections of the 1981 Act and initiate the criminal investigation. The legal procedure typically involves:

Custodial Interrogation and Documentation: The crew members are formally booked, their identities verified, and statements recorded. Given the large number (79 individuals), this is a significant logistical and legal undertaking requiring translation services.
Seizure and Evidence Submission: The boats, fishing gear, and the seized catch are documented as primary evidence. The boats are typically impounded, and the catch is either auctioned or destroyed, depending on its condition and legal status. Crucially, the ICG’s documented evidence including the precise GPS coordinates confirming the violation of the EEZ and the finding of fresh fish and gear forms the core of the prosecution’s case.
Judicial Process: The arrested crew members are produced before a local magistrate. The prosecution must prove that the vessels were foreign-owned and that they engaged in unauthorized fishing within the Indian EEZ. Violations of the 1981 Act can lead to substantial fines (potentially running into lakhs of rupees) and imprisonment for the crew and the forfeiture of the seized vessels.

The ultimate fate of the crew often depends on diplomatic intervention. While the legal process can lead to conviction and imprisonment, foreign policy considerations often lead to the crew’s early release and repatriation. The diplomatic missions of both nations negotiate the terms, which usually include the payment of fines (sometimes covered by the vessel owners or the respective government) and the formal transfer of the fishermen back to Bangladesh. The seized vessels, however, face a higher risk of forfeiture by the Indian government as a definitive deterrent against future IUU activity. The process is lengthy, underscoring the intense, necessary coordination between the ICG, the West Bengal Police, the judiciary, and the Ministries of External Affairs to ensure that law is enforced, sovereignty is respected, and the humanitarian aspect is managed efficiently, preventing prolonged detention of the 79 fishermen.

Technology and Tactics in Maritime Law Enforcement

The successful interception and apprehension of the three Bangladeshi fishing boats (BFBs) highlights the advanced technological capabilities and precise tactical execution employed by the Indian Coast Guard (ICG). Effective maritime law enforcement in a vast area like the Bay of Bengal relies on a significant technological advantage over the vessels engaged in Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing, which are typically equipped with only rudimentary navigation systems.

The ICG's technological arsenal for surface and aerial surveillance is multi-layered. Key detection technologies include:

High-Frequency Surface Wave Radar (HFSWR): These systems provide long-range over-the-horizon detection, essential for tracking small, non-metallic vessels far from the coast.
Automatic Identification System (AIS) Monitoring: Commercial vessels and larger fishing vessels are legally required to transmit AIS signals. Vessels engaged in IUU fishing often turn off their AIS to evade detection. The absence of an expected AIS signal in a busy shipping lane is a key indicator for ICG patrols.
Dornier 228 and Chetak/Dhruv Helicopters: These platforms are equipped with maritime surveillance radar and Electro-Optical/Infrared (EO/IR) pods. The EO/IR systems allow ICG teams to visually identify vessels and activities (like net deployment) even during low-visibility conditions or at night, providing the irrefutable evidence needed for prosecution.

The tactics used for interception are designed for swift, non-lethal compliance, prioritizing the safety of both the ICG crew and the 79 fishermen. The sequence is typically:

Aural and Visual Warning: The ICG vessel establishes contact, often using flashing lights, sirens, and radio communications (often in Bengali through onboard interpreters) to order the BFB to stop and be boarded.
Manoeuvring and Escort: The ICG vessel uses its superior speed and manoeuvrability to position itself to prevent escape without causing collision.
Boarding: A specialized, armed boarding party uses a Fast Interceptor Boat (FIB) to board the foreign vessel. The boarding is conducted in a highly professional, assertive manner to secure the vessel and the crew quickly.
Inspection and Documentation: The boarding team secures the bridge and engine room, verifies the crew’s documents, photographs the evidence (catch, gear, GPS coordinates), and establishes communication with the ICG command center.

The successful capture of three vessels and 79 crew members without incident is a testament to the ICG’s standardized operating procedures and the training of its personnel. This technological and tactical superiority allows the ICG to maintain continuous enforcement pressure, serving as the most effective deterrent against future violations of India's maritime sovereignty in the Northern Bay of Bengal.

Resource Depletion and Fisheries Management in the Northern Bay of Bengal

The constant stream of illegal fishing activity across the IMBL, typified by the apprehension of these Bangladeshi vessels, is a symptom of a deeper crisis: catastrophic resource depletion and unsustainable fisheries management in the Northern Bay of Bengal, an area crucial to the livelihoods of coastal communities in both India and Bangladesh. The problem is a classic case of the Tragedy of the Commons, exacerbated by poverty, population density, and technological disparities.

Both India and Bangladesh have witnessed significant pressure on their near-shore fish stocks due to exponential increases in fishing fleet size, the use of powerful, non-selective gear, and inadequate enforcement of regulatory measures (such as seasonal bans and size limits). In Bangladesh, where the majority of the coastal population relies on fishing, the pressure has been particularly acute, driving vessels further into the deep sea, where the likelihood of crossing into the more productive Indian EEZ increases dramatically. The Northern Bay of Bengal is biologically rich due to riverine inputs (Ganges-Brahmaputra Delta) and monsoon-driven nutrient cycling, but this richness is being rapidly exhausted. The depletion is not just affecting high-value commercial species but also the entire pelagic and benthic ecosystem. This ecological reality creates an economic feedback loop: as Bangladeshi waters become exhausted, the economic incentive to risk illegal entry into Indian waters where fish stocks are better managed or less exploited becomes overwhelming for the desperate fishermen.

Addressing this issue requires a coordinated, bilateral fisheries management approach that transcends simple law enforcement. Key areas of necessary action include:

Joint Stock Assessment: India and Bangladesh must share scientific data and collaborate on regular, independent assessments of shared fish stocks to establish accurate Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) levels.
Harmonization of Regulations: There is an urgent need to harmonize regulations across the IMBL, particularly regarding seasonal fishing bans, the prohibition of destructive fishing gear (like certain trawls and fine-mesh nets), and the imposition of minimum legal sizes for key species.
Capacity Building and Alternative Livelihoods: Bangladesh needs support to build its own effective maritime surveillance and enforcement capacity to police its side of the EEZ. Simultaneously, international aid and government programs are necessary to provide alternative, sustainable livelihoods (e.g., aquaculture, tourism, value-added processing) for the vast population currently dependent on dwindling marine capture. Without these joint conservation and management efforts, the ICG's enforcement actions, while legally necessary, will continue to be a repetitive cycle of interception, legal processing, and repatriation, failing to address the fundamental resource scarcity that drives the IUU fishing crisis in the first place. The long-term stability of the Northern Bay of Bengal ecosystem and the sustained livelihood of its surrounding populations depend on this binational, scientific collaboration.

The Role of West Bengal Police and the Coastal Security Nexus

The successful conclusion of the at-sea operation by the ICG is immediately reliant on the preparedness and effective function of the State-level law enforcement mechanism, primarily the Marine Police, which falls under the purview of the West Bengal Police. This handover at Frazerganj highlights the critical coastal security nexus between the central agency (ICG) and the State machinery. The ICG’s role is to ensure security and law enforcement up to the shoreline; the State Police then takes over the legal, custodial, and logistical responsibilities on land.

The Marine Police functions as the primary investigative agency under the Coastal Security Scheme (CSS), a major initiative launched by the Ministry of Home Affairs to strengthen the surveillance and security of India's coast. Their role in this instance is multi-faceted and crucial for securing the legal outcome:

Legal Processing: The Marine Police at Frazerganj register the FIR against the 79 fishermen and the vessel owners, formally invoking the Maritime Zones of India Act, 1981. They are responsible for the custodial care, interrogation, and preparation of the charge sheet for submission to the magistrate. This requires officers trained in maritime law and cross-border crime investigation.
Logistics and Impoundment: Handling the physical logistics of three large fishing vessels and ensuring their secure impoundment at the designated jetty or harbor is a major task. The boats must be maintained in their seized condition as evidence until the court passes an order for forfeiture or release.
Interagency Coordination: The police coordinate the complex handoff process with the ICG, ensuring all evidence (GPS data, photographs, seizure memos, and crew documentation) is legally transferred. They also liaise with the central Ministry of External Affairs and the judicial system for the ultimate disposition of the crew and vessels.

The high number of individuals apprehended requires significant custodial capacity and security protocols to prevent escape or further incidents. The efficiency of the West Bengal Marine Police in managing this critical final stage is often the determinant of whether the ICG’s enforcement action results in a successful prosecution and a lasting deterrent. The continuous operation of the ICG, as stated in the source, relies on the confidence that the State Police will effectively handle the land-based follow-up, thereby completing the cycle of maritime law enforcement and safeguarding national interests from the sea to the shore. This seamless transition is a testament to the improved coordination protocols implemented since the post-26/11 security enhancements, reinforcing India’s overall coastal defense mechanism.

International Conventions and India’s Maritime Obligations

The Indian Coast Guard's apprehension of the Bangladeshi vessels and fishermen is a clear exercise of the rights and responsibilities mandated by international law, primarily the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), 1982. UNCLOS is often referred to as the "Constitution of the Oceans," and it provides the comprehensive legal framework that defines maritime zones and sovereign rights, thereby legitimizing India's actions in its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).

Specifically, Article 56 of UNCLOS grants the coastal state (India) sovereign rights over its EEZ for the purpose of exploring and exploiting, conserving, and managing the natural resources, whether living or non-living. The Bangladeshi fishing boats (BFBs), lacking authorization, were directly violating this sovereign right by engaging in fishing activities in Indian waters. This violation gives India the unequivocal right to take necessary enforcement measures. Furthermore, Article 73 outlines the enforcement powers of the coastal state in its EEZ. It explicitly states that in exercising its sovereign rights, the coastal state may take such measures, including boarding, inspection, arrest, and judicial proceedings, as may be necessary to ensure compliance with the laws and regulations adopted by it. The ICG's operation interception, boarding, inspection, and the subsequent handover for judicial proceedings is perfectly aligned with the scope and limits of enforcement action permitted by UNCLOS Article 73.

However, the same international convention imposes several obligations on India regarding the humanitarian treatment of the apprehended foreign crew:

Prompt Release: Article 73 mandates the prompt release of arrested vessels and their crews upon the posting of reasonable bond or other security. This obligation is a humanitarian safeguard, intended to prevent the undue, prolonged detention of fishermen facing charges for fisheries violations.
Humane Treatment: Customary international law and general human rights principles, often referenced in UNCLOS, demand that the 79 fishermen be treated humanely during custody, with provisions for food, medical care, and contact with consular officials.
Notification: India must promptly notify Bangladesh of the arrest and the penalties imposed.

By executing the seizure and then swiftly handing the crew over to the police for judicial processing, India demonstrates its adherence to both the enforcement rights (Article 73) and the legal/humanitarian obligations under international law. This dual commitment ensures that the ICG’s action, while firm, is globally defensible and supports the rule of law on the high seas, reinforcing India's standing as a responsible maritime power in the Bay of Bengal.

Balancing Sovereignty, Sustainability, and Diplomacy

The apprehension of three Bangladeshi fishing boats and 79 crew members by the Indian Coast Guard is a microcosm of the enduring challenges facing maritime nations in the Bay of Bengal.

It is a complex issue defined by the necessary defence of national sovereignty under the Maritime Zones of India Act, 1981, the imperative of environmental sustainability against the backdrop of resource depletion, and the demands of diplomacy in managing a recurring bilateral irritant. The ICG’s action, relying on advanced surveillance technology and precise tactical execution, successfully upheld the law and deterred further incursions into India’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).

Yet, the long-term solution lies not just in enforcement, but in addressing the root causes: the economic desperation driving fishermen across the IMBL and the shared ecological crisis resulting from unsustainable fishing practices. While the legal process, handled efficiently by the Marine Police and judiciary, must proceed to enforce the rule of law, the ultimate stability of the Northern Bay of Bengal depends on India and Bangladesh enhancing their collaboration. This partnership must extend beyond the quick repatriation of the 79 individuals and focus on joint scientific stock assessment, harmonization of fishing regulations, and targeted capacity building to ensure the sustainability of the marine resources that are vital to the shared economic security of both nations. The cycle of apprehension will only break when the economic incentive for illegal activity is removed through environmental recovery and diplomatic cooperation.

. . .

References:

Discus