The Delhi High Court has upheld the Indian Army’s decision to terminate Commanding Officer Samuel Kamalesan, who refused to participate in weekly regimental religious parades, citing his Christian faith. The court noted that Kamalesan’s conduct affected military discipline and unit cohesion—core principles of the Indian Armed Forces.
A division bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur emphasized that the termination was not based solely on his Annual Confidential Report (ACR), but on his consistent refusal to attend religious parades despite multiple counselling sessions by his superiors. According to the order, Kamalesan repeatedly stood outside the religious premises, citing personal beliefs, a fact confirmed by his Commanding Officer.
The Delhi High Court acknowledged the importance of religious freedom but underlined that the Indian Armed Forces are built on the ethos of placing the nation above self—and certainly, above religion. “Our Armed Forces unite personnel of all religions, castes, and creeds through the uniform,” the court said, stressing the critical role of unit cohesion in combat effectiveness.
Kamalesan, commissioned in 2017 as a Lieutenant in the 3rd Cavalry Regiment, served as Troop Leader of Squadron B, comprising Sikh personnel. He argued that the Regiment maintained only a Mandir and Gurudwara and lacked a Sarv Dharm Sthal or church. He claimed he accompanied troops to these places during religious events but sought exemption from entering the sanctum during worship rituals.
However, the Army stated that despite several attempts to help Kamalesan understand regimental culture and the importance of shared participation, he remained defiant. The Chief of Army Staff concluded that his continued service was undesirable due to misconduct.
The Delhi High Court agreed, stating that actions acceptable in civilian life may not meet the higher discipline expected in the military. “To a civilian, the punishment may seem harsh, but military discipline demands a different standard. The Armed Forces must decide what is necessary for maintaining command and morale,” the bench observed.
The judges concluded that Kamalesan’s conduct undermined secularism in the Army and could damage officer-troop camaraderie, especially crucial in combat. The court also accepted the Army’s reasoning that a court-martial was impractical due to the sensitive nature of the case.Dismissing Kamalesan’s plea for reinstatement, the Court upheld the termination as a carefully considered and justified disciplinary decision.
