HC upholds Army’s decision to sack officer who objected to attend religious parades
The Delhi High Court has upheld the Indian Army’s decision of terminating a Commanding Officer who refused to take part in weekly religious parades, saying it went against the discipline and unity expected in the armed forces. The officer refused to attend the parades because of his Christian faith.
The court explained that while the Army includes people from many religions, their main duty is to safeguard the nation. It stated that unity in the military comes from wearing the same uniform and working together, not from religious or regional differences. The judges pointed out that it is especially important for Commanding Officers to set an example.
The Court observed that the officers must ensure their soldiers can practice their own faiths respectfully, while still keeping the group united and disciplined.
‘Uniform a unifying factor’
The court explained that while the Army includes people from many religions, their main duty is to safeguard the nation. It said unity in the military comes from wearing the same uniform and working together, not from religious or regional differences
The court also said although some regiments may have names linked to a religion or use war cries that sound religious, these are only meant to motivate soldiers and bring them together. They are not signs of religious preference.
The Bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur also highlighted that the armed forces respect the religious beliefs of their personnel, as outlined in paragraph 332 of military regulations, which mandates that religious customs and prejudices be honoured.
The officer in question, Samuel Kamalesan, was commissioned in 2017 and served in a mixed-religion unit consisting of three squadrons made up of Sikh, Jat, and Rajput personnel. He claimed the unit didn’t have a ‘Sarv Dharm Sthal’ (common prayer space) for all religions and requested exemption from entering temples during religious rituals.
In his plea, the officer argued that he had accompanied his troops to the temple and gurdwara during weekly religious parades and festivals and had merely sought “exemption from entering the innermost part/sanctum of the temple during rituals such as puja, havan, or aarti.
The officer said his request was “not only as a sign of respect to his monotheistic Christian faith, but also as a sign of respect towards the sentiments of his troops so that his non-participation while in the inner shrine would not desecrate and offend their religious sentiments.”
Despite this, the Army said he was repeatedly counseled but still refused to attend the parades. As a result, he was dismissed without pension or gratuity. The Chief of Army Staff decided his continued service was not suitable due to his refusal to follow orders, which affected the team spirit in his unit.
The court agreed with the Army’s decision. It said that discipline and unity must come first, especially in war-like situations. In conclusion, the officer’s actions harmed group unity, and his dismissal was justified.
India