Delhi HC Questions Army for Not Recruiting Married Women as JAG
The Delhi High Court bench on the petition seeking induction of married women in the position of Judge Advocate General asked the army about their objection to the issue. The Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C. Hari Shankar particularly questioned the army after BSF women bikers’ tremendous performance on Republic Day.
“After the Republic Day display by the women (the fighter pilots and the BSF bikers) how can you (Army) still maintain these objections (to recruitment of married women in the Judge Advocate General),”
“After the Republic Day display by the women (the fighter pilots and the BSF bikers) how can you (Army) still maintain these objections (to recruitment of married women in the Judge Advocate General),” said the bench on the matter before listing the matter for further hearing on March 19.
The HC also advised the army to take legal action against the discrimination against married women instead of responding to the affidavit.
ALSO READ: Navy Sacks Sailor After Sex Change
Advocate Charu Wali Khanna, appearing for petitioner Kush Kalra read the PIL in front of the court. It said that there was “institutionalised discrimination” against married women. Khanna also told the bench that earlier the Indian army had only prohibited the appointment of married women, but after the PIL, they have extended it to married men.
Kalra has filed two separate petitions seeking women’s recruitment in the Territorial Army and Judge Advocate General. The second petition calls for the employment of gainfully employed women in the Territorial Army (TA). Presently, only gainfully employed men can enter TA.
TA is an entity consisting of volunteers. The TA provides military training to these volunteers to fight for the country’s defence in case of an emergency.
“The work performed by the Territorial Army is for civilian good and by not allowing females to be a part of Territorial Army the army recruitment is acting unfair and bias towards whole female community,” says the petition.
“It ends up victimizing its subject (women) in the name of protection,” it adds.
Picture credit- Live Law