According to a report by Independent (UK) on Wednesday, November 26, 2025, India’s Supreme Court has upheld the army’s decision to dismiss a Christian officer, Lieutenant Samuel Kamalesan, for repeatedly refusing to take part in mandatory rituals at his regiment’s Sikh gurudwara. The court ruled that his refusal was a serious act of indiscipline and disrespect toward the soldiers he led.
The judges said Lt Kamalesan relied on his own personal interpretation of Christianity to avoid participating in practices that were considered part of everyday regimental life in the Indian armed forces, where shared religious ceremonies help build unity.
The ruling supported a previous decision by the Delhi High Court, which said the officer placed his personal religion above a lawful command. Lt Kamalesan joined the 3rd Cavalry regiment in 2017 and served as a troop leader in a squadron made up mostly of Sikh soldiers.
Many Indian Army regiments have shared places of worship known as Sarv Dharm Sthal, meaning “place of all faiths”, to promote religious harmony. In his unit, this space functioned as both a Hindu temple and a Sikh gurudwara.
Lt Kamalesan said entering the inner sanctuary to perform rituals clashed with his Protestant Christian beliefs and would violate his monotheistic faith. He said he was willing to attend ceremonies outside the main shrine and claimed his troop did not object to his position.
His lawyer, senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, argued that the conflict arose because one superior officer insisted he perform rituals he believed were incompatible with his faith.
However, a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, with Justice Joymalya Bagchi, rejected this argument. Chief Justice Kant said Lt Kamalesan ignored advice from both his commanders and a pastor—someone from his own religion—who told him that entering a Hindu or Sikh shrine did not go against Christian teachings.
The chief justice said leaders must set an example, telling the lawyer that the officer had insulted his troops. He added that even if Lt Kamalesan excelled in many areas, he was unsuitable for the Indian Army if he could not uphold the secular values required of military personnel.
Justice Bagchi emphasised that India’s constitutional protection of religious freedom covers only essential religious practices, not all personal feelings. He questioned where Christian scripture forbids entering a temple or gurudwara and said an officer cannot use a private interpretation of doctrine to defy a lawful order.
The army explained that Lt Kamalesan had been repeatedly counselled about the purpose of devotional parades, which are meant to promote unity, pride, and motivation. It said his continued refusal weakened cohesion and could damage morale.
The defence ministry told the court that his dismissal followed a showcause notice issued in 2019 after he persisted in refusing mandatory ceremonies. The Supreme Court also rejected his request to reduce the punishment despite his previously clean service record.
The judges said a strong message was needed to ensure officers respect the beliefs of the soldiers they lead and to maintain secular discipline within the forces.
When his lawyer previously argued in the High Court that he could have faced a court-martial instead, the army replied that such proceedings were not practical because the matter involved personal religious beliefs.
In the Supreme Court, the lawyer said his client supported regimental diversity and took part in celebrations like Holi and Diwali, but should not be forced to perform religious rituals inside a shrine of another faith.
The bench did not accept this claim. Chief Justice Kant questioned whether such behaviour could be tolerated in a disciplined force and dismissed the argument that being ordered by a single officer justified disobeying established regimental practices.
Post a Comment