Denial of Remedies in the Armed Forces.

An Introspection into Transparency, Abuse of Process, and Erosion of Natural Justice**

By Col Amit Kumar (Retd), Advocate

The Armed Forces of India are institutions built on discipline, honour, and trust. Soldiers submit unquestioningly to authority, believing that the system they serve will, in turn, protect their dignity, rights, and reputation. However, an emerging and deeply troubling trend demands urgent introspection: the systemic denial of remedies to soldiers both victims and accused particularly through the deliberate withholding of information and procedural safeguards.

RTI Denial: Knowledge as a Controlled Weapon

Access to information is the backbone of fairness. The Right to Information Act, 2005, was enacted to dismantle opacity and empower citizens against arbitrary power. Yet, within the Forces, RTI is often treated as a threat rather than a tool for accountability.

Information critical to a soldier whether regarding complaints, preliminary inquiries, administrative actions, evidence relied upon, or decision-making processes is frequently denied at the very stage when such knowledge is most vital. This denial is not incidental; it is institutional and intentional.

A soldier branded as “blameworthy” or “accused” is systematically deprived of access to information that would allow:

●      Challenging jurisdictional defects

●      Reporting abuse of process

●      Exposing colourable exercise of power

●      Seeking timely legal or administrative remedies

This colonial-style control of information perpetuates a command-centric culture, where authority is insulated from scrutiny and accountability.

From Allegation to Ruin: The Presumption of Guilt

Once a soldier is alleged to be blameworthy often without evidence or following a procedurally flawed inquiry the consequences are immediate and devastating:

●      Reputational damage within the unit and society

●      Psychological trauma and social isolation

●      Procedural barriers to challenge the process

●      Prejudiced treatment in subsequent proceedings

The principle of “innocent until proven guilty” becomes illusory. The soldier is treated as condemned long before any adjudication.

What follows is a vicious cycle: arbitrary proceedings → denial of information → forced prosecution → prolonged litigation.

Complaints That Vanish into Silence

Equally alarming is the fate of complaints raised by soldiers who are victims of procedural abuse. Representations pointing out violations of Army Rules, principles of natural justice, bias, or mala fides are:

●      Not acknowledged

●      Not inquired into

●      Not acted upon

This silence is not neutral; it actively legitimises wrongdoing. The system, by inaction, endorses abuse of power.

Transparency Replaced by Forced Prosecution

Ironically, the denial of transparency does not reduce litigation it multiplies it. Soldiers, left with no internal remedy, are compelled to approach:

●      Armed Forces Tribunal

●      High Courts

●      Supreme Court

Litigation becomes a last resort, not by choice but by compulsion. The State spends public resources defending actions that could have been corrected administratively had transparency and accountability existed.

Acquittal Without Accountability: A Cruel Irony

Perhaps the most painful irony lies at the end of the journey.

When a soldier is finally acquitted—after years of mental agony, financial strain, and social stigma there is no accountability:

●      No action against officers who abused power

●      No inquiry into malicious or reckless prosecution

●      No compensation for mental trauma

●      No institutional apology

The system moves on, but the scars remain.

Families of soldiers suffer silently:

●      Children face social stigma

●      Spouses endure isolation and uncertainty

●    Elderly parents bear the weight of dishonour inflicted by the very institution their child served, Justice, delayed and incomplete, becomes a hollow victory.

Erosion of Natural Justice and Institutional Faith

The cumulative effect of these practices is devastating:

●      Principles of natural justice are diluted

●      Rule of law is subordinated to command convenience

●      Institutional faith erodes from within

A force that does not protect its own from arbitrary power risks moral corrosion.

The Need for Urgent Introspection and Reform

This is not an argument against discipline or authority. Discipline without justice is oppression. Authority without accountability is abuse.

What is urgently required:

●      Transparent RTI compliance, especially in disciplinary matters

●      Time-bound response to complaints alleging abuse of process

●      Accountability mechanisms for wrongful prosecution

●      Restorative remedies for acquitted soldiers

A shift from colonial command mindset to constitutional governance in uniform

Conclusion

A soldier’s greatest strength is trust ,the trust in the chain of command and in the fairness of the system. When that trust is broken, discipline itself is weakened.

The Armed Forces must introspect, not defensively but courageously. Transparency is not an enemy of discipline; it is its strongest ally. Justice within the Forces is not a concession it is a constitutional obligation.

Silence today will only ensure louder reckoning tomorrow.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Author: 

Colonel Amit Kumar (Retd.)

Former Officer – Infantry & Judge Advocate General’s Branch, Indian Army

Advocate | Author | TEDx Speaker | Motivational Speaker | Military Law Expert