Chief Judicial Magistrate A D Mougal ordered that Tae Min-hun and Kim Sol-ik should be freed forthwith and restored to the place from where they were arrested on July 16 -- namely the ship, which is anchored in the Kandla harbour, along with 44 other crew members.

The customs gave no reason for their anti-climactic submission before the court. Strikingly, it came on the day the two North Koreans, both booked under the Arms Act, became eligible for bail; they had spent 60 days in a special jail in judicial custody, without the authorities filing a charge-sheet.

Sources said that the decision to drop prosecution was taken ``at the highest level in New Delhi'' for reasonsnot known here. Only on September 8, Kandla customs authorities had issued notices to seven parties for starting adjudication proceedings in the matter. The only Indian party among them is Kandla-based handling agent ACT, which had unloaded 13,000 tonne sugar.

Curiously, all the while that the North Koreans where in jail, they made no attempt to obtain bail, nor did any advocate appear in court on their behalf, although officials from the North Korean Embassy in New Delhi did try to meet them.

The ship was detained following an intelligence tip-off that it carried military hardware for Pakistan. It had berthed at Kandla to unload a consignment of sugar. During checking, packed cargo, marked water purification equipment, was found in the ship's hold.

The cargo was unloaded, defence experts were summoned to examine it, and the crew questioned. It was said that the cargo included missile components, plus equipment for an entire missile-making factory, all bound for Pakistan, along with detailedblueprints.

The ship's master and chief officer were arrested and booked under the Arms Act and also on the charge of improper declaration of goods. However, both maintained that they were innocent and had committed no offence under international law.

Certain Indian officials had then expressed doubt whether the charge of misdeclaration of goods could stand legal scrutiny. They were of the opinion that while the equipment could be used for military purposes, it had other, non-military uses also.