North India Statesman
[ad_1]
New Delhi: A very sensitive and interesting case was heard in the Supreme Court on Tuesday, where the bench headed by the country’s new Chief Justice (CJI) Surya Kant came down heavily on a former army officer, terming him “quarrelsome” and “unfit” for the army.
The case related to the petition of a former Christian army officer, who was dismissed from the Army because he refused to take part in religious activities at a Gurudwara located at his place of posting.
CJI Surya Kant: “What kind of message is this giving?”
CJI Surya Kant looked very angry during the hearing of the case. He fully supported the decision to dismiss the officer from the Army, describing his conduct as “gross indiscipline”.
The bench said, “What kind of message is he giving, being an army officer? He should have been dismissed. Does such a quarrelsome person deserve to be in the army? He may be a good officer, but he is not good for the Indian Army.”
What was the whole matter?
Former lieutenant posted in the 3rd Cavalry Regiment of the Indian Army Samuel Kamleson Was made the ‘Troop Leader’ of a contingent of Sikh soldiers. There was a temple and a Gurudwara in the regiment. Kamlesan claimed that he used to go to the temple and gurudwara with his soldiers for religious parades, but citing his ‘Christian’ beliefs, he had refused to go inside the gurudwara and enter the sanctum sanctorum during the aarti-havan in the temple.
When his senior officer ordered him to go to the Gurudwara, he refused to obey.
Court raised sharp questions on lawyer’s argument
Kamlesan’s lawyer argued that his client was dismissed just for not visiting the Gurudwara once, which is a violation of his fundamental right to religious freedom (Article 25).
On this the bench asked sharp questions:
- CJI Surya Kant asked: “What justifies such conduct in a disciplined force? How can a military leader refuse to accompany his soldiers to a place they consider sacred?”
- The bench also said, “Gurudwara is one of the most secular places. The way he is behaving, isn’t he insulting other religions?”
- Justice Bagchi asked: “Where is it written in Christianity that entering a temple or gurudwara is prohibited?”
The Army said the officer repeatedly refused to attend mandatory religious parades, which was weakening the unit’s cohesion. Therefore, it was “undesirable” to retain him in service. The Supreme Court, justifying this decision of the Army and the earlier decision of the Delhi High Court, rejected the petition of the former officer.
