When Samuel Kamalesan, a Christian officer in the Indian Army, asked to not take part in certain Hindu and Sikh rituals in his regiment’s weekly religious parades, the army dismissed him without a trial in 2021. Left without a job and cut off from military benefits, Kamalesan challenged his termination in the Delhi High Court, claiming it violated the right to freedom of religion guaranteed to every citizen by the Indian Constitution.
This June, the court ruled that the dismissal was justified, claiming that choosing his religion above the lawful command of his superior was an “act of indiscipline.”
The court further emphasized that officers like Kamalesan have an additional responsibility to foster bonds and unity in the troops. Yet some legal scholars questioned how that requirement for religious bonding fits in a secular country like India.
“When someone is removed from the forces for not participating in religious rituals (because it would lead to destroying the unity), is it not an acknowledgement that there cannot be any other bonding agent apart from religion?” Sri Harsha Kandukuri, a legal researcher, wrote in The News Minute.
Some Christians decried the ruling. A. Santhanam, a Jesuit lawyer, told Crux that the dismissal “constitutes religious coercion and undermines India’s secular character” and said that “no authority or order can compel someone to act against their beliefs—such coercion amounts to a form of violence.”
A current member and a former member of the Indian Army told CT they had not faced the coercion Kamalesan had experienced. As a minority in the military, Christians decide based on their personal consciences how to engage with the dominant Hindu or Sikh religious rituals that are a part of military life.
During colonial rule, the British recruited soldiers into either class regiments (each one made up of a single ethnic group) or class company regiments (each one made up of a mix of religions and ethnicities). The British believed that recruiting from a single ethnic class would foster a sense of communal pride, which in turn would make it harder for the troops to unite and fight against the British.
Recruiting extensively from the Sikh, Rajput, and Gorkha communities, the British officers considered these groups “martial classes” that were biologically more suited for the military and warfare.
After India gained independence from Britain, the government tried to remove class-based recruitment, but single-class regiments in the Indian Army remain prevalent. Religion serves an important motivational function in the army. For instance, the war cries of some regiments are slogans invoking Hindu deities or verses from Sikh holy texts. Each regiment has designated religious teachers to lead the troops every week in worship known as “religious parades.”
Despite the deep-rooted presence of religion and ethnic divides, the Delhi High Court in its judgement maintained that the Indian Army is a “secular institution” and that officers should place troop morale over their religious convictions, reiterating the popular principle in the Indian Army that “my religion is my soldier’s religion.”
Kamalesan, who joined the army as a lieutenant in 2017, was part of the 3rd Cavalry Regiment, an armored regiment that uses tanks and predominantly recruits Hindu and Sikh soldiers. The regiment has a mandir (Hindu temple) and a gurdwara (Sikh temple) on its premises but has no church or Sarv Dharm Sthal, a shrine where people of all faiths can worship. For instance, a Sarv Dharm Sthal in a regiment with Hindu and Christian soldiers might have both the Bible and Hindu sacred texts, along with sermons from different religions taking place one after the other.
Leading a troop of about 20 Sikhs, Kamalesan was required to join weekly religious parades, as well as religious festivals. Kamalesan claimed in his petition to the Delhi High Court that he was willing to “remain present with his fellow troops in the temple courtyard,” take off his shoes and belt, put on a turban with clean hands when necessary, and “view the rituals in the inner shrine.”
All he sought exemption from was entering the innermost part of the gurdwara or mandir when Sikhs and Hindus performed rituals like puja (prayers), arti (waving a lamp in front of a deity), or havans (burning sacrifices in front of a deity).
Yet the commanding officer of the regiment refused and forced Kamalesan to participate. Soon after, Kamalesan’s superior initiated disciplinary action against him. According to Kamalesan’s petition, his superiors harassed him—verbally abusing him, mocking his faith, and threatening to end his career. They also subjected him to military punishments, including placing him on nighttime guard duty without sufficient rest, causing sleep deprivation.
Kamalesan’s superiors also prevented him from getting promoted, the petition said. They barred the Christian lieutenant from taking any upskilling courses needed for advancement. His annual evaluations contained negative remarks about his religious beliefs. And despite passing the requisite exams, Kamalesan watched as his juniors got promotions and he remained at the same rank.
Officers told Kamalesan that if he agreed to join in the religious rituals, even if it meant prostrating halfway before the idols, they would lift all the restrictions and sanctions against him. The petition also said they sent him to counseling sessions with the pastor of the local church, other Christian officers, and religious teachers, who tried to explain to him the necessity and rationale behind these religious rituals.
When Kamalesan’s superiors saw no change in his stand, they issued a show-cause notice in 2019 ordering him to explain his “acts of misconduct.” While he filed complaints, authorities rejected them.
In March 2021, Kamalesan received a final notice that the Indian Army was dismissing him permanently without pension or benefits. Military court denied him the chance for a trial because his superiors claimed his case was sensitive since it involved religion.
Although the Delhi High Court supported the military’s decision, the Indian Constitution allows Kamalesan the right to appeal to the Supreme Court.
A 31-year-old Christian soldier from a Northeastern regiment was surprised to hear about Kamalesan’s experience. Although he had served in the military for the past decade, he said he had never seen any commanding officer force soldiers to perform religious rituals. CT granted him anonymity, as speaking out on these issues could cost him his job.
“In our regiment, we are never forced to bow down before idols, apply tika [a paste of vermilion or sandalwood applied on the forehead], or eat food offered to idols,” he said. “We are only expected to attend both Christian and Hindu sermons.”
He serves in a regiment with personnel belonging to a mix of religions, and the religious parades take place in a Sarv Dharm Sthal.
Despite the freedom in his regiment, the soldier does not always shy away from eating food offered to Hindu idols, known as prasad. “While taking prasad, we always tell ourselves and others, ‘Why avoid it? Even if it’s food offered to their gods, we still have our true, living God,’” he said. “But even then, sometimes we take it and sometimes we leave it.”
Brigadier Neil John, a former Christian army officer, said that he participated in all religious parades and rituals—including bowing before idols, doing arti, and eating prasad—during his 33-year tenure, as he believed it was part of his duty. He said that Paul’s message in 1 Corinthians 8 about eating food sacrificed to idols guides his conscience, as “an idol is nothing at all in the world” and “there is no God but one” (v. 4).
He believes that no matter what religion military leaders come from, once they are part of a regiment, they must stand with their troops and worship the divine—regardless of what forms their gods take—to maintain morale.
Yet he feels that the punishment against Kamalesan was exceedingly severe.
“Religion is very personal. A mandir parade is a parade where the unit commanding officer is attending; therefore, all below him attend,” he told CT. “But to compulsorily expect individuals of other faiths to follow rituals and practices intrinsic to a particular religion is rather harsh.”
