Soldier goes to court to marry girlfriend

Army won’t let him quit to get hitched to Sri Lankan national

October 31, 2012 09:12 am | Updated 09:12 am IST - Bangalore

All is fair in love and war. File Photo: V. V. Krishnan

All is fair in love and war. File Photo: V. V. Krishnan

Will Major Vikas Kumar of the Indian Army be able to marry his Sri Lankan girlfriend Arnila Ranamali Gunaratne who is pursuing her M.Phil. in Bangalore?

A Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Vkramajit Sen and Justice B.V. Nagarathna, of the High Court will soon decide on the order of the Indian Army, which had rejected the 34-year-old’s request to cast away his uniform so that he can marry a foreign national.

As Army rules don’t permit personnel to marry those who loath to give up their foreign citizenship, Major Kumar, an officer with Corps of Signals, decided to resign post as Ms. Gunaratne (29) was unwilling to give up her Sri Lankan nationality.

However, the Army did not accept his resignation saying he had not completed the mandatory period service, there is a shortage of officers in the Corps of Signals and he is under investigation for unauthorised contract with a foreign national and failing to report it to the authorities.

A single judge bench had set aside the Army’s order but had allowed the Army to investigate the Major’s conduct with regard to contact with a foreign national.

The Defence Ministry appealed against the order before the Division Bench.

During the hearing on Tuesday, the Bench, in a lighter vein asked whether Army was against love marriage or did it think love at first sight was not a possibility? The Bench also referred to former President K.R. Narayanan [the supreme commander of the armed forces], who had married a Myanmarese.

Major Kumar, an engineering graduate, met Ms. Gunaratne in 2011 and they fell in love. They planned to marry in November 2011 but Army’s rejection of his resignation put paid to all that. The smitten Major has undertaken to pay back all expenses the Indian Army spent on his training besides not seeking any terminal benefit for his service with the Army since 2000.

After hearing the appeal filed by the Union, the Division Bench has reserved its verdict.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.