Latest news with #ArmyAct
The Hindu
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Armed forces united by uniform not divided by religion: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has upheld the termination of services of a Christian Army officer over his consistent refusal to fully participate in the weekly regimental religious parades and said the armed forces were united by their uniform rather than being divided by their religion. A bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur rejected the petition by the Indian Army Lieutenant, who served as a 'Troop Leader' of a squadron, against the termination order passed on March 3, 2021, that dismissed him from the Indian Army without pension and gratuity. The court opined that the petitioner kept his religion above the lawful command from his superior, and disobedience was an offence under the Army Act. "In the present case, the question is not of religious freedom at all; it is a question of following a lawful command of a superior. It is not disputed by the petitioner that his superiors have been calling upon him to attend the religious parades by even entering the sanctum sanctorum and perform the rituals if this would help in boosting the morale of the troops. In the present case, the petitioner has kept his religion above a lawful command from his superior. This clearly is an act of indiscipline," said the bench. "Our Armed Forces comprise personnel of all religions, castes, creeds, regions, and faiths, whose sole motto is to safeguard the country from external aggressions, and, therefore, they are united by their uniform rather than divided by their religion, caste, or region," it stated. The petitioner submitted that his regiment maintained only a temple and a gurudwara for its religious needs and parades, and being of monotheistic Christian faith, he sought exemption from entering the innermost part of the temple while accompanying his troops for the weekly religious parades and other events. The authorities defended the termination, saying efforts were made through other Christian officers in the army, and he was also taken to the pastor of a local church, who told the petitioner that entering the 'sarv dharm sthal' as part of his duties would not impinge on his Christian faith. However, he remained undeterred. In its judgement passed on May 30, the court "saluted" the dedication of "those who guard our borders day and night in adverse conditions" and said uniformity in appearance as well as respect for all the religions was quintessential to a cohesive, disciplined, and coordinated functioning of an armed force and the ethos of the armed forces placed nation before religion. It further said that although regiments might historically bear names associated with religion or region, it did not undermine the secular ethos of the institution, and religious war cries only serve a purely motivational function, intended to foster solidarity and unity amongst the troops. The court observed that in the present case, the Chief of Army Staff concluded that the conduct of the petitioner was in violation of the essential military ethos, and it could not "second-guess" the decision unless it was manifestly arbitrary. "While there can be no denial of the fact that the petitioner has the right to practice his religious beliefs, however, at the same time, being the Commanding Officer of his troops, he carries additional responsibilities as he has to not only lead them in war but also has to foster bonds, motivate personnel, and cultivate a sense of belonging in the troops," the court observed. It therefore held that the petitioner's refusal to fully participate in the weekly regimental religious parades, despite counselling at multiple levels of command and multiple opportunities being given to him for compliance, demonstrated an unwillingness to adapt to the requirements of military service and the armed forces. It said the termination of the petitioner was justified, and since the religious sentiments and the morale of the troops were in question, a formal court martial was "unsuitable for resolution" as it could be detrimental to the secular fabric of the armed forces. "While to a civilian, this may appear a bit harsh and may even sound far-fetched, however, the standard of discipline required for the Armed Forces is different. The motivation that is to be instilled in the troops may necessitate actions beyond ordinary civilian standards," the court observed. "We find no grounds to interfere with the Impugned Order dated 03.03.2021. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed," it held.
Time of India
3 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Armed forces united by uniform not divided by religion: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has upheld the termination of services of a Christian army officer over his consistent refusal to fully participate in the weekly regimental religious parades and said the armed forces were united by their uniform rather than being divided by their religion. A bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur rejected the petition by the Indian Army Lieutenant, who served as a 'Troop Leader' of a squadron, against the termination order passed on March 3, 2021, that dismissed him from the Indian Army without pension and gratuity. The court opined that the petitioner kept his religion above the lawful command from his superior, and disobedience was an offence under the Army Act. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like IIT Delhi AI Programme IITD TAILP Apply Now Undo "In the present case, the question is not of religious freedom at all; it is a question of following a lawful command of a superior. It is not disputed by the petitioner that his superiors have been calling upon him to attend the religious parades by even entering the sanctum sanctorum and perform the rituals if this would help in boosting the morale of the troops. In the present case, the petitioner has kept his religion above a lawful command from his superior. This clearly is an act of indiscipline," said the bench. "Our Armed Forces comprise personnel of all religions, castes, creeds, regions, and faiths, whose sole motto is to safeguard the country from external aggressions, and, therefore, they are united by their uniform rather than divided by their religion, caste, or region," it stated. Live Events The petitioner submitted that his regiment maintained only a temple and a gurudwara for its religious needs and parades, and being of monotheistic Christian faith, he sought exemption from entering the innermost part of the temple while accompanying his troops for the weekly religious parades and other events. The authorities defended the termination, saying efforts were made through other Christian officers in the army, and he was also taken to the pastor of a local church, who told the petitioner that entering the 'sarv dharm sthal' as part of his duties would not impinge on his Christian faith. However, he remained undeterred. In its judgement passed on May 30, the court "saluted" the dedication of "those who guard our borders day and night in adverse conditions" and said uniformity in appearance as well as respect for all the religions was quintessential to a cohesive, disciplined, and coordinated functioning of an armed force and the ethos of the armed forces placed nation before religion. It further said that although regiments might historically bear names associated with religion or region, it did not undermine the secular ethos of the institution, and religious war cries only serve a purely motivational function, intended to foster solidarity and unity amongst the troops. The court observed that in the present case, the Chief of Army Staff concluded that the conduct of the petitioner was in violation of the essential military ethos, and it could not "second-guess" the decision unless it was manifestly arbitrary. "While there can be no denial of the fact that the petitioner has the right to practice his religious beliefs, however, at the same time, being the Commanding Officer of his troops, he carries additional responsibilities as he has to not only lead them in war but also has to foster bonds, motivate personnel, and cultivate a sense of belonging in the troops," the court observed. It therefore held that the petitioner's refusal to fully participate in the weekly regimental religious parades, despite counselling at multiple levels of command and multiple opportunities being given to him for compliance, demonstrated an unwillingness to adapt to the requirements of military service and the armed forces. It said the termination of the petitioner was justified, and since the religious sentiments and the morale of the troops were in question, a formal court martial was "unsuitable for resolution" as it could be detrimental to the secular fabric of the armed forces. "While to a civilian, this may appear a bit harsh and may even sound far-fetched, however, the standard of discipline required for the Armed Forces is different. The motivation that is to be instilled in the troops may necessitate actions beyond ordinary civilian standards," the court observed. "We find no grounds to interfere with the Impugned Order dated 03.03.2021. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed," it held.
Hindustan Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Armed forces united by uniform not divided by religion: Delhi HC
New Delhi, The Delhi High Court has upheld the termination of services of a Christian army officer over his consistent refusal to fully participate in the weekly regimental religious parades and said the armed forces were united by their uniform rather than being divided by their religion. A bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur rejected the petition by the Indian Army Lieutenant, who served as a 'Troop Leader' of a squadron, against the termination order passed on March 3, 2021, that dismissed him from the Indian Army without pension and gratuity. The court opined that the petitioner kept his religion above the lawful command from his superior, and disobedience was an offence under the Army Act. "In the present case, the question is not of religious freedom at all; it is a question of following a lawful command of a superior. It is not disputed by the petitioner that his superiors have been calling upon him to attend the religious parades by even entering the sanctum sanctorum and perform the rituals if this would help in boosting the morale of the troops. In the present case, the petitioner has kept his religion above a lawful command from his superior. This clearly is an act of indiscipline," said the bench. "Our Armed Forces comprise personnel of all religions, castes, creeds, regions, and faiths, whose sole motto is to safeguard the country from external aggressions, and, therefore, they are united by their uniform rather than divided by their religion, caste, or region," it stated. The petitioner submitted that his regiment maintained only a temple and a gurudwara for its religious needs and parades, and being of monotheistic Christian faith, he sought exemption from entering the innermost part of the temple while accompanying his troops for the weekly religious parades and other events. The authorities defended the termination, saying efforts were made through other Christian officers in the army, and he was also taken to the pastor of a local church, who told the petitioner that entering the 'sarv dharm sthal' as part of his duties would not impinge on his Christian faith. However, he remained undeterred. In its judgement passed on May 30, the court "saluted" the dedication of "those who guard our borders day and night in adverse conditions" and said uniformity in appearance as well as respect for all the religions was quintessential to a cohesive, disciplined, and coordinated functioning of an armed force and the ethos of the armed forces placed nation before religion. It further said that although regiments might historically bear names associated with religion or region, it did not undermine the secular ethos of the institution, and religious war cries only serve a purely motivational function, intended to foster solidarity and unity amongst the troops. The court observed that in the present case, the Chief of Army Staff concluded that the conduct of the petitioner was in violation of the essential military ethos, and it could not "second-guess" the decision unless it was manifestly arbitrary. "While there can be no denial of the fact that the petitioner has the right to practice his religious beliefs, however, at the same time, being the Commanding Officer of his troops, he carries additional responsibilities as he has to not only lead them in war but also has to foster bonds, motivate personnel, and cultivate a sense of belonging in the troops," the court observed. It therefore held that the petitioner's refusal to fully participate in the weekly regimental religious parades, despite counselling at multiple levels of command and multiple opportunities being given to him for compliance, demonstrated an unwillingness to adapt to the requirements of military service and the armed forces. It said the termination of the petitioner was justified, and since the religious sentiments and the morale of the troops were in question, a formal court martial was "unsuitable for resolution" as it could be detrimental to the secular fabric of the armed forces. "While to a civilian, this may appear a bit harsh and may even sound far-fetched, however, the standard of discipline required for the Armed Forces is different. The motivation that is to be instilled in the troops may necessitate actions beyond ordinary civilian standards," the court observed. "We find no grounds to interfere with the Impugned Order dated 03.03.2021. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed," it held.
Express Tribune
3 days ago
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Thousands of ID cards, passports blocked over involvement in May 9 riots
Listen to article Passports and national identity cards of thousands of individuals linked to the May 9, 2023, riots have been blocked. More than 5,500 citizens from Lahore and other cities and towns across Punjab have had their passports blacklisted, officials from the Department of Passport and Immigration told local media. The revelation came a day after Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) in Islamabad convicted and sentenced 11 accused to various jail terms and fines in cases related to the violence on May 9, 2023, over charges of attacking the Ramna police station, attacking policemen, setting properties on fire, and spreading terrorism. May 9 cases refer to the violent attacks on state installations in 2023 following the arrest of PTI founder Imran Khan over corruption charges. Several people were arrested in these cases, which were tried and convicted by military courts as well as ATCs in different cities. Read More: 19 convicted in May 9 riots granted pardon Regarding the blocking of passports and national identity cards, sources said names were flagged based on geo-fencing data, which captured mobile or landline numbers detected near protest sites. In many cases, this data alone led to individuals being added to the blacklist, even without direct evidence of involvement. Some of those affected have submitted proof of innocence to police and law enforcement agencies. However, their names remain on the blacklist, prompting hundreds to file legal challenges in court. The Lahore High Court has taken up dozens of such cases and summoned passport officials along with relevant records. In several hearings, officials have submitted documents confirming the blacklisting of passports. Read More: Shah Mahmood Qureshi, Yasmin Rashid indicted in May 9 riots case During proceedings, it emerged that many individuals worked in nearby government or private offices and had only made calls to family members during the unrest, but were still flagged due to their mobile phone location data. In court filings, the Passport and Immigration Department stated that it does not hold the authority to add or remove names from the blacklist. That power, it said, rests with the Ministry of Interior, which manages both the blacklist and the Exit Control List (ECL). The ministry has reportedly placed names on the blacklist for any degree of involvement in the May 9 events. Those whose passports have expired cannot renew them until their names are cleared. May 9 Riots The May 9 riots erupted nationwide following the arrest of former prime minister and PTI founder Imran Khan, after which PTI leaders and workers staged protests targeting both civil and military installations, including Jinnah House and the General Headquarters (GHQ) in Rawalpindi. The military condemned the events as a "Black Day" and decided to try the protesters under the Army Act. As a result of the unrest, many PTI members were arrested and tried in military courts. In December, a military court convicted 25 individuals, including Imran Khan's nephew, Hassan Khan Niazi, and later sentenced 60 more. Also Read: Won't allow May 9 mayhem happen again In January, 19 convicts had their sentences pardoned following successful mercy appeals, although PTI expressed dissatisfaction over the limited number of pardons. The military trials had initially been halted following a Supreme Court ruling but were resumed following the court's instructions to finalize pending cases and announce judgments for those involved in the violent incidents. PTI Chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan has strongly opposed the trial of civilians in military courts, citing constitutional concerns.
Business Recorder
4 days ago
- Politics
- Business Recorder
SC limits army courts' powers under Constitution
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court declared that under Article 175 (3) of the Constitution, the courts martial and the forum of appeal under the Pakistan Army Act, 1952, have no jurisdiction to prosecute persons accused of clause (d) of the Act. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail on Friday issued his verdict on the intra-court appeals against the Supreme Court judgment on military courts. A seven-judge Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, and comprising Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Musarrat Hilali, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan on May 7 by majority of 5-2 had set aside the SC judgment and restored Section 2 (1) (d) and Section 59 (4) of Pakistan Army Act, 1952. The majority had referred the matter to the government/ parliament for considering and making necessary amendments/ legislation in the Army Act, and allied Rules for providing an independent right of appeal in the High Court, against the conviction awarded to the persons by the court martial/military courts, within a period of 45 days. Two members of the Constitutional Bench, namely, Justice Mandokhail and Justice Naeem, disagreed with the majority judgment, and set aside the convictions and sentences awarded to civilians by the courts martial for 9th May 2023, incidents, and declared them to be without jurisdiction. Justice Mandokhail judgment said that the jurisdiction to try civilians extended to courts martial, especially, in the light of the judgment of FB Ali ceases to exist. The discretion of 'prescribed officer' assigned to him by virtue of Section 94 of the PAA relating to transfer of cases of civilians to courts martial, in respect of civil offences under clause (d), is no more available. However, the courts martial have a limited jurisdiction to the extent of prosecuting members of the Armed Forces for violation of military laws and civil offences. It said that the logic behind the separation of the judiciary from the executive, under Article 175 of the Constitution, is that criminal offences are against the State, whereas, the executive is responsible for administration of the same. A person who breaches a law, is an accused of the State, therefore, the executive having an interest into the matter, cannot itself perform as a judge to punish the accused. It is for this reason, sub-Article (3) of Article 175 of the Constitution mandates that the judiciary shall be separated from the executive, within 14 years of commencement of the Constitution. The judgment noted that upon insertion of clause (d) in subsection (1) of Section 2 and subsection (4) in Section 59 of the Pakistan Army Act (PAA), the courts martial comprising serving officers of the Army are prosecuting the persons accused of offences of clause (d). It said that the purpose of adding the said clause in the PAA is that the offences mentioned therein are prejudicial to the interests of the Army. Admittedly, it is a fundamental principle of natural justice that no one ought to be a judge in his own cause or in which he has an interest. This principle is strictly observed to avoid any instance of bias, resulting into injustice. Under such circumstances, the courts martial and the forum of appeal under the PAA, manned or run by the executive, under the command, control and discipline of the Federal Government, cannot be regarded as unbiased, independent or impartial forums. They cannot protect the fundamental rights and liberties of citizens in a criminal charge or for the determination of their rights and obligations. Thus, courts martial and the forum of appeal are violative of Articles 2A, 175 (3) and 227 of the Constitution. The judgment held that the courts martial are administered judicially, not as a part of the judicature erected under Article 175 of the Constitution, but as part of the organisation of the Armed Forces itself. The jurisdiction of courts martial trying military personnel for service offences and civil offences is different from judicial power exercised by ordinary courts for the general offences against the State. The judgment said: 'We have no doubt in our minds that being a special legal framework, the PAA is primarily a disciplinary statute that applies exclusively to a specified group of people; i.e., members of the Armed Forces.' Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
