The court recognised the officer’s patriotic service in the Indian Air Force and considered his termination ‘harsh and disproportionate’
Team Clarion
CHANDIGARH — The Punjab & Haryana High Court recently reinstated a Muslim Indian Air Force (IAF) officer who was dismissed from service for contracting a second marriage. The IAF terminated the officer’s services despite a second marriage being permissible under his personal law as a Muslim.
A division bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Sudeepti Sharma emphasised the officer’s role as the sole breadwinner for his family, stating, “The deprivation of livelihood to the petitioner and his family members would be violative of Article 21.”
The court recognised the officer’s patriotic service in the Indian Air Force and considered his termination “harsh and disproportionate.”
The officer, whose identity remains undisclosed, was terminated from service after contracting a second marriage. The IAF, like other branches of the Indian armed forces, operates under a set of rules and regulations that prohibit personnel from engaging in polygamy. This is enforced uniformly across all religions under the Air Force Act, which states that marrying a second time during the subsistence of a first marriage is a breach of conduct.
However, the officer’s legal defence argued that as a Muslim he is allowed to marry up to four women under Islamic personal law. The officer challenged his dismissal before the Punjab & Haryana High Court, contending that his personal law should take precedence over the Air Force’s regulations.
In a landmark judgment, the court ruled in favour of the officer, ordering his reinstatement. The court’s decision highlighted the need to balance religious freedom with service rules, especially in cases where personal law allows for practices that may be at odds with military regulations.
The court acknowledged that the Air Force Act applies uniformly, but it also recognised the officer’s constitutional right to practice his religion. The judgment suggests that the officer’s second marriage cannot be grounds for termination if it does not interfere with his professional duties.
This ruling has significant implications for the balance between religious freedoms and the uniformity of military regulations. It opens up discussions about the application of personal law within disciplined forces like the Indian military, where strict rules are generally applied across all personnel, regardless of their religion. The judgment may lead to further legal scrutiny of the Air Force Act and similar regulations in other branches of the armed forces.
The case also brings to light the tension between the secular, uniform application of military law and the recognition of religious practices in personal life. While personal law allows certain freedoms, the armed forces emphasise a uniform code of conduct that prioritises discipline and the collective ethos of the institution over individual religious practices.
The court’s decision to reinstate the officer reflects the judiciary’s evolving stance on balancing individual religious rights with institutional rules. It sets a precedent for how the courts might address similar cases in the future, especially within the armed forces. This case underscores the need for a nuanced approach to the application of personal law within the framework of military discipline.
