What's new

Indian Army told by HC "dont behave like khap punchayat"

Spring Onion

PDF VETERAN
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
41,403
Reaction score
19
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Don't behave like a khap panchayat, Karnataka HC tells Army


yas Vyas, TNN | Oct 31, 2012, 01.46AM IST


BANGALORE: A bench headed by Chief Justice Vikramajit Sen of the Karnataka high court on Tuesday compared the Army to a khap panchayat for blocking a young officer's bid to marry a 29-year-old Sri Lankan woman he's in love with.

Major Vikas Kumar's dreams of marrying the Bangalore-based 29-year old Sri Lankan student hit a roadblock with the Army ordering an investigation into "the purpose behind him coming in contact with a foreign national". In response to his plea to quit since service rules bar officers from marrying foreigners, his commanders refused to relieve him, citing a severe staff crunch. The signals corps officer then went to court.

A division bench presided over by Chief Justice Sen Tuesday reserved judgment on an appeal filed by the Union government challenging an order of a single judge bench which had ruled in Maj. Kumar's favour.

Displeased with the arguments of the government counsel, Justice Sen observed: "This is not a khap panchayat, this is the Army." He also said, "We can't understand the Army's stand at all. This is most unfortunate for the man. One of India's Presidents, also the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, was married to a foreigner." (A reference to K R Narayanan who was married to Ma Tint Tint of Myanmarese origin).

Maj Kumar won round one of the legal battle this June. A single judge of the high court ruled in his favour saying, "The Army can't refuse his request for release from the services since he wants to marry a foreign national." The Union government challenged the order in the division bench.

The government counsel argued, "We have ordered an investigation to find out under what circumstances and for what purpose he has come in contact with a foreign national. Also, his regiment is severely short-staffed, so we cannot relieve him."

Maj. Kumar's advocate told the court he filed his second petition after the single judge's order had been pending with the Army for about four months. "As per the rules, you were expected to decide the application within 120 days either saying Yes or No. Such an inquiry ordered by you is an unknown law," said Justice Sen.

Case snapshot
* Maj. Vikas Kumar joined the Army in 2000 and underwent a BE course sponsored by the Army

* He's with the Corps of Signals in the northeast India

* On June 29, 2011, Vikas Kumar filed an application seeking release from the services saying he wanted to marry a foreign national unwilling to give up her nationality

* Application rejected it saying 'it was incomplete'

* Maj Kumar challenged the order in the high court, where a single judge ruled in his favour

* Union government challenged the order in the division bench

Don't behave like a khap panchayat, Karnataka HC tells Army - The Times of India
 
The Army is bound by orders which have been enacted by the parliament.

The Defence Services Regulations & Army Act gives guidelines on this. Unless the rules are changed they will remain. This also can happen only by the parliament.

Why should the court compare the Army's decision to a Khap Panchayat ? No commander can change the rules simply because its not a rule enacted by himself.

Next there are countless instances where people have married foreigners - the lady changed her nationality. Only, in the Armed Forces it is prerequisite to change before not after the marriage like the Ex Pres or Rajiv Gandhi.

We havent seen the last of this.

The only change one expects is permission to release the officer - provided he pays the cost of training imparted to him at Govt expense ( which also is a rule of GOI).

Lastly, one appreciates the love this man has for the lady which is strong enough to challenge a system.
 
You didn't get it. The young officers superiors ordered an enquiry which was not within regulations. It was harassment tactics, pure and simple. Some ossified colonel somewhere needs his backside soundly kicked.
 
The Army is bound by orders which have been enacted by the parliament.

The Defence Services Regulations & Army Act gives guidelines on this. Unless the rules are changed they will remain. This also can happen only by the parliament.

Why should the court compare the Army's decision to a Khap Panchayat ? No commander can change the rules simply because its not a rule enacted by himself.

Next there are countless instances where people have married foreigners - the lady changed her nationality. Only, in the Armed Forces it is prerequisite to change before not after the marriage like the Ex Pres or Rajiv Gandhi.

We havent seen the last of this.

The only change one expects is permission to release the officer - provided he pays the cost of training imparted to him at Govt expense ( which also is a rule of GOI).

Lastly, one appreciates the love this man has for the lady which is strong enough to challenge a system.

Army has own rules indeed.

a small question, if the Indian court orders would it be like that Army will break own rules?
 
is there another fight b/w Army & govt....now SC also involved...
 
Army has own rules indeed.

a small question, if the Indian court orders would it be like that Army will break own rules?

Hypothetical. The court asked the Army to observe its own rules as laid down by statute.

The court cannot order the Army to act outside the law, and the law is clear.

The court ordered the Army not to be silly, because the rules were not followed.

is there another fight b/w Army & govt....now SC also involved...

Please learn to read English; it is an essential prerequisite to communications, as important, often more important than writing.

The government pleader appeared for the Army; the government was in no way opposed to the Army, and it has not been opposed ever, for the simple reason that the Army is an arm of the government.

The Supreme Court is not involved. Do read the article.
 
You didn't get it. The young officers superiors ordered an enquiry which was not within regulations. It was harassment tactics, pure and simple. Some ossified colonel somewhere needs his backside soundly kicked.

Since you appear to be a veteran you would be aware of rules regarding ' Contact with foreign nationals".

If the officer had disclosed his contacts with his lady love he is clear.

If not , the guy who was approached for permission by him to marry was right to ask for this which is mandatory according to the Army Order.

If he hadnt asked for this or ordered an enquiry - the superior officer would have collected a rap.

Bureaucracy at work.
 
This seems to be a prett clear cut case. The IA does not permit its personal to marry non-Indian nationals and this guy's Girlfriend has refused to give up her SL nationality (very selfless!) so the Officer has asked to be allowed to resign but this has been refused because he hasn't served his mandatory service, which is (as you would imagine) MANDATORY!! The IA can't go around letting every soldier who wants to leave early to do so- there would be anarchy in the service. This OA officer has signed a contract and now he wants to renage on his part?? If the IA took any other stance then the one they are taking I'd be very disappointed- they are sticking to their guns and good for them. This officer knew what he was getting into when he signed up.
 
Nice to see army can be reined in India by High court.

"Reined in"?? What are you implying? The army was never in a position it needed to be reined in- it has always been 100% subservient to the civilians. What I keep having to remind you Pakistanisis that India isn't Paksitan and the IA isn't the PA!
 
The rule prohibiting officers from marrying foreigners is stupid and should be repealed. It is his oath to serve the nation. Not his wife's or her family's.
 
How many more years does this particular officer have to serve?

How many more years does this particular officer have to serve?
 

Back
Top Bottom