Discipline or disproportionate punishment?

The question of how the armed forces should deal with allegations of adultery is a deeply sensitive one. While the Army Act continues to treat extramarital relationships as punishable offences, such matters often fall within the realm of marital discord, a domain better suited for counselling, sensitivity, and discretion rather than court-martial proceedings.

A Civil Issue, not just a disciplinary matter

As rightly observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Joseph Shine v. Union of India, adultery is fundamentally a matter of marital relations entailing personal choices, emotions, and context. Globally, such issues are handled through marriage counsellors, mediation, and family-focused mechanisms that aim for resolution while preserving dignity and potential reconciliation. When the Army interprets adultery strictly through the lens of discipline, it risks sidelining emotional and social complexity. Court-martial proceedings with their inquiries, statements, and trials often result in public naming, shaming, and humiliation, eradicating chances of reconciliation and inflicting lasting harm on families and children.

Family games

Collateral damage: families and children

Allegations of adultery rarely impact only the accused officer. Wives, children, parents all can face stigma, emotional trauma, and social isolation. Careers get ruined, families destabilise, and dependent children suffer losses that could have been prevented with a more compassionate approach.

The problem of patriarchal framing

The colonial-era phrase “stealing the affection of a brother officer’s wife” encapsulates the patriarchal mindset embedded in the law, reducing women to objects of possession and denying their agency. Such rigid, one-sided framing makes misuse of the law more likely and ignores the nuanced realities of interpersonal relationships—where culpability can be shared or entirely absent of wrongdoing.

Covering society reformation

A soldier should not be deprived of the constitutional dignity extended to civilians under Joseph Shine. Rather than blaming judges or the organisation, this is a social issue demanding institutional and cultural reform.

The legal landscape in India

The Army Act and adultery

Section 45 of the Army Act, 1950, criminalises conduct unbecoming of an officer, while Section 63 penalises acts prejudicial to good order and discipline. Together with colonial-era interpretations, these provisions have allowed extramarital affairs to be tried as service offences.

The Supreme Court’s Intervention – Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2018)

This landmark decision decriminalised adultery for civilians, striking down Section 497 IPC and related provisions of the CrPC. The Court held that criminalisation violated the rights to privacy, equality, and dignity, and perpetuated gender stereotypes. However, the judgment included a caveat: armed forces could still apply disciplinary measures for adultery where it affected discipline or operational readiness.

Other Relevant Cases

• Lt Col Nitisha & Others v. Union of India (2021): The Court emphasised substantive equality and rejected systemic gender bias in the armed forces.
• Selvi J. Jayalalitha v. State of Tamil Nadu (privacy principle): Reinforced privacy and autonomy as constitutional values.
• Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017): The nine-judge bench held privacy to be a fundamental right under Article 21.

These cases collectively point to a constitutional trajectory away from moral policing and toward dignity, privacy, and equality even for those in uniform.

Human dimension: families, children, & humanity

Beyond the Individual: The Ripple Effect of Punishment

Every allegation of adultery within the armed forces produces a ripple far beyond the accused soldier. Families, children, parents, and communities are drawn into a process that is public, formal, and often humiliating. Unlike a civil divorce or family court dispute, which is largely private and governed by confidentiality, a military inquiry exposes intimate family matters to commanding officers, subordinates, and sometimes even the media.

Family games

The impact is magnified by the unique nature of military life:

• Soldiers live in tightly knit cantonments where privacy is limited.
• Their careers, housing, and social circles are tied to their unit and rank.
• Families live in quarters under the same command structure, often depending on the same institution for schooling, healthcare, and social support.

In such an environment, an adultery allegation can destabilise an entire household overnight.

Family games

Stigma and isolation: family on trial

When an officer is accused of adultery, the spouse and children are often indirectly placed on trial too.

• Social Stigma: The military community, despite its esprit de corps, can become a source of gossip and ostracism.
• Loss of Benefits: Dismissal or demotion can result in the loss of housing, schooling, and medical benefits for dependents.
• Psychological Trauma: Children may suffer bullying or anxiety as their family’s situation becomes public.
• Economic Vulnerability: A spouse who is financially dependent on the soldier may suddenly lose income and support.

Unlike civilian cases, where the State rarely interferes with family support unless there is criminality, the military process can inflict immediate collateral damage on dependents who have no role in the alleged conduct.

Marital strain is often structural, not moral

Soldiers and officers endure long postings, frequent relocations, and high operational stress. Spouses may live separately for months or years at a time. The sense of isolation can be acute, particularly for young families stationed in remote or sensitive areas.

This is not to excuse adultery but to recognise it as part of a human response to extraordinary stress. Where civilian couples might access marriage counselling, therapy, or extended family support, military families often face these challenges alone. Criminalising the result of these pressures—rather than providing support—misses an opportunity for prevention and healing.

Family games

Essence of humanity and human relationships

At its heart, adultery laws in the armed forces confront a basic truth: humans are relational beings. Love, attraction, and companionship are central to our lives. Relationships are not static contracts but living, evolving connections. People can grow apart; they can make mistakes; they can seek comfort elsewhere.

Punitive systems tend to reduce these complexities to binary categories of “guilt” and “innocence.” But human relationships are not binary; they are shades of emotional, social, and moral complexity. Recognising this does not undermine discipline it acknowledges reality.

Gender dynamics: women’s agency and the myth of possession

The phrase “stealing the affection of a brother officer’s wife” casts women as property. It erases their agency and portrays them as passive victims whose loyalty can be “stolen.” In reality, relationships are mutual. When two consenting adults engage in an extramarital affair, both exercise agency. Yet under the current military framing, women’s voices and choices are often sidelined, while men bear disproportionate punishment or vice versa, depending on who holds rank and power.

This patriarchal mindset conflicts with the principles of gender equality affirmed in cases like Lt Col Nitisha. It also increases the risk of misuse where allegations of adultery become a weapon in marital disputes or command politics.

Children as the silent victims

In any disciplinary or legal process involving adultery, children are the most silent yet most affected stakeholders. They experience:

• Loss of Stability: Sudden transfers, housing changes, and economic disruptions.
• Emotional Confusion: Shame, anger, or guilt as their parents’ private lives are scrutinised.
• Identity Crisis: Military children often strongly identify with their parent’s service and uniform. Seeing that parent publicly humiliated can undermine their own sense of self.

These harms can have lifelong consequences, including difficulties with trust, relationships, and mental health.

Why confidentiality matters

Confidentiality is not just a procedural nicety; it is a safeguard of dignity. Family courts conduct proceedings in-camera to protect privacy. Mediation sessions are confidential to encourage openness. Military inquiries, by contrast, often require written statements, depositions, and the presence of multiple officers. Even if proceedings are technically closed, the community gossip mill ensures that intimate details spread quickly.

Family games

A rights-respecting approach would establish confidential channels for dealing with such allegations, similar to how medical or mental health information is handled.

Psychological toll on soldiers

Being accused of adultery is not just a career threat—it is a psychological crisis. Soldiers and officers describe feelings of:

• Shame and Humiliation: Being judged by peers and superiors on intimate matters.
• Loss of Identity: Years of service can be overshadowed by a single allegation.
• Fear for the Future: Loss of pension, social status, and career prospects.
• Isolation: Few colleagues want to associate with someone under such scrutiny.

In extreme cases, the stress can lead to depression or even suicidal ideation. This is not an exaggeration: the mental health burden of disciplinary proceedings is well documented, though under-researched in India’s armed forces.

Misuse factor: allegations as a weapon

Because adultery is still a punishable offence in the military, it can be misused in ways that would be impossible in civilian life:

• Marital Disputes: A spouse may use an adultery complaint to gain leverage in a divorce or custody battle.
• Command Rivalries: Superiors or colleagues may exploit allegations to sideline an officer.
• Retaliation: Whistleblowers or dissenting officers can be targeted with moral allegations to discredit them.

This weaponisation undermines both justice and discipline, turning a supposed moral safeguard into an instrument of vendetta.

Global perspective on families and support systems

Modern militaries have recognised the need to support rather than punish families:

Family games

• US Military Family Advocacy Program (FAP): Offers counselling, crisis intervention, and confidential support for relationship issues.
• UK Service Families Federations: Provide independent advocacy and guidance for families facing personal crises.
• Canada’s Military Family Services: Offers free confidential counselling for marital and family issues.

These programmes aim to reduce family stress, prevent misconduct, and support retention. India’s armed forces have family welfare organisations, but they are not designed to handle intimate disputes confidentially or professionally.

Compassionate approach to military marriages

Rather than treating adultery as a disciplinary issue, the armed forces could adopt a three-tiered model:

Family games

1. Preventive support: Education on relationship resilience, counselling services, and mental health resources.
2. Confidential mediation: Neutral professionals to help couples address grievances before they escalate.
3. Targeted discipline only when operational integrity is threatened: Reserving punitive measures for situations involving abuse of rank, coercion, or compromise of security—not for consensual private relationships.

This model respects both the institution and the individual.

Reframing discipline: from control to care

Discipline is often equated with control. But in modern organisational theory, discipline also means mutual respect, clarity of expectations, and supportive structures. A soldier who feels respected and supported is more likely to maintain discipline voluntarily. A soldier who feels monitored and punished for private matters may develop resentment and disengagement.

Why the human dimension strengthens operational readiness

Far from weakening the armed forces, a humane approach to adultery strengthens them:

• Morale: Soldiers who trust their institution are more motivated and loyal.
• Retention: Families are less likely to fracture under stress, reducing attrition.
• Reputation: The armed forces are seen as progressive and just, enhancing public trust.
• Legal Security: Reducing constitutional challenges by aligning military law with civilian jurisprudence.

Global practices and lessons for India

Why a global lens matters

Armed forces worldwide share similar challenges high stress, frequent deployments, and close-knit communities. Yet the way each country addresses adultery among service members varies widely. Some retain criminal penalties; others treat it as a private matter unless it affects operational integrity. By studying these systems, India can find models that balance discipline, dignity, and human rights.

United States: evolving away from moral policing

For decades, adultery was punishable under Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). But after extensive criticism, the U.S. military significantly narrowed the scope:

• Current standard: Adultery is only punishable if it prejudices “good order and discipline” or discredits the armed forces.
• Factors considered: Rank disparity, misuse of power, operational impact, and whether the conduct compromised security or violated direct orders.
• Counselling and support: The U.S. military’s Family Advocacy Program (FAP) offers confidential counselling, crisis intervention, and preventive education to reduce family stress and misconduct.

This shift reflects recognition that private consensual affairs, without operational consequences, do not warrant court-martial proceedings.

United Kingdom: civilianization of military justice

The UK has progressively integrated military justice into the civilian legal framework:

• No Separate Crime of Adultery: The British armed forces no longer treat adultery as a standalone offence.
• Focus on Abuse of Power: Discipline action occurs mainly where relationships involve coercion, subordinates, or security breaches.
• Confidential Support: The Service Families Federation and welfare officers provide independent support to military families, reducing stigma.

This model recognises that marital infidelity, while morally contentious, is primarily a civil or family matter.

Canada: prioritising mental health and family services

Canada’s National Defence Act does not criminalise adultery. Instead, it:

• Provides Military Family Services offering counselling, mediation, and mental health support.
• Disciplines only where conduct affects operational readiness or involves coercion.
• Promotes a “well-being first” approach, integrating mental health professionals into units.

By separating personal from professional conduct, Canada preserves operational discipline while respecting private life.

Family games

Australia: welfare-oriented framework

The Australian Defence Force (ADF):

• Does not prosecute adultery per se.
• Focuses on “unacceptable behaviour” only when it impacts workplace conduct or breaches Defence Force policies.
• Offers a network of Defence Community Organisations to support spouses, children, and separated families.

This approach places trust in individual responsibility and organisational support, reserving discipline for genuine misconduct.

Family games

France and Germany: privacy first

Both France and Germany treat adultery among military personnel as a private matter unless it intersects with operational or security concerns. Their armed forces emphasise confidentiality, family counselling, and secular principles of individual liberty. These countries view respect for private life as intrinsic to the rule of law and morale.

Key global trends

From this comparative overview, several patterns emerge:

1. Shift from criminalisation to regulation: Most democracies have moved away from treating adultery as a crime to viewing it as a personal or administrative issue.
2. Focus on abuse of power: The line is drawn where relationships involve rank disparity, coercion, or mission compromise.
3. Confidential support services: Military organisations provide family counselling and mediation to prevent escalation.
4. Integration with civilian standards: Military justice increasingly mirrors civilian privacy rights and equality principles.

International human right norms

Under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, privacy and family life are protected rights. Criminalising consensual relationships among adults raises concerns about:

• Right to privacy (Article 17 ICCPR): Protection from arbitrary or unlawful interference in private life.
• Right to equality and non-discrimination (Article 26): Laws must not disproportionately target one gender or group.
• Right to dignity: Punishments that humiliate or stigmatise may violate human dignity.

India, as a party to these treaties, has obligations to harmonise its military laws with these international standards.

Lessons for India: moving beyond colonial-era morality

India’s Army Act 1950 retains language inherited from British colonial military law, such as “stealing the affection of a brother officer’s wife.” Ironically, Britain itself has abandoned this approach. India now stands at a crossroads:

• Maintain a colonial-era framework that treats soldiers as state property with no private sphere, or
• Adopt a 21st-century model that respects privacy, gender equality, and dignity while safeguarding operational discipline.

Principles for reform drawn from global practice

1. Distinguish between private and operational misconduct

A soldier’s private life should be off-limits unless:

• Security or mission integrity is compromised.
• There is coercion, harassment, or abuse of authority.
• It involves subordinates or violates direct orders related to deployment or security.

2. Provide confidential counselling and mediation

• Establish a dedicated, confidential “Family & Relationship Support Cell” within the armed forces.
• Train counsellors and mediators who understand military life.
• Create safe reporting channels for both spouses and soldiers.

3. Eliminate gender-biased language

• Replace “stealing affection” with gender-neutral, consent-based terminology.
• Recognise the agency of all adults involved.

4. Protect families and children from collateral damage

• Maintain housing, schooling, and benefits for dependents until proceedings conclude.
• Provide child-focused mental health services during family crises.

5. Establish procedural confidentiality

• Conduct any inquiry in-camera, with strict penalties for breach of confidentiality.
• Limit circulation of personal information to only essential personnel.

6. Embrace preventive education

• Include modules on relationship health, stress management, and ethics in military academies and training.
• Promote an ethos of care rather than only control.

Rebutting the “discipline requires moral policing” argument

Some critics argue that relaxing adultery laws would erode discipline. Global evidence shows otherwise:

• The U.S., UK, Canada, and Australia maintain high operational standards without criminalising adultery.
• Discipline in these forces derives from professionalism, training, and leadership—not moral policing.
• Modern soldiers are trusted with lethal weapons and strategic decisions; they can also be trusted with their private lives.

Indian constitutional principles support this shift

The Supreme Court’s Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2018) decision already decriminalised adultery for civilians, holding that:

• Criminalisation violates privacy, autonomy, and dignity.
• It treats women as property.
• It is out of sync with contemporary constitutional morality.

Extending this reasoning to the armed forces would not erode national security; it would align military justice with constitutional values.

Operational readiness through family wellbeing

Global militaries recognise that strong family support correlates with operational readiness:

• Reduced absenteeism due to family crises.
• Higher retention of trained

Institutional implications: why reforms matter

The societal lens: soldiers are citizens too

While military service carries special obligations, soldiers remain human beings with constitutional rights. Treating adultery as a purely disciplinary matter ignores the broader societal context:

• Soldiers have the right to privacy and dignity, as affirmed in Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017).
• The law should not impose moral policing that civilians are no longer subjected to.
• Overreach erodes trust in the institution, creating alienation rather than loyalty.

Institutional costs of over-penalisation

Excessive punishment or rigid moral policing has tangible institutional costs:

• Attrition: Talented officers may leave rather than endure intrusive scrutiny.
• Morale: Fear of punitive action for private conduct reduces engagement and esprit de corps.
• Litigation: Misalignment with constitutional rights invites legal challenges, consuming resources and damaging reputation.

The gender dimension and equality

Patriarchal language and frameworks disproportionately affect women:

• Women are often framed as passive objects in adultery cases, stripping them of agency.
• Male soldiers may also face bias depending on rank, relationships, or command politics.
• Gender-neutral, consent-based frameworks align better with equality principles established by Lt Col Nitisha & Others v. Union of India (2021).

Psychological and operational angle

Human relationships, family stress, and personal crises directly affect operational effectiveness:

• Soldiers under familial or emotional strain may experience distraction, fatigue, or reduced decision-making ability.
• Confidential support and mediation prevent escalation, preserving both mental health and mission readiness.

Cultural opportunity

Reforming adultery laws is also about transforming culture:

• From rigid moralism to respect for individual dignity.
• From punitive paternalism to supportive leadership.
• From secrecy and stigma to structured, confidential conflict resolution.

This cultural shift strengthens both the human and operational fabric of the armed forces.

Key takeaways

1. Soldiers are citizens and deserve constitutional protections.
2. Over-penalisation harms morale, retention, and reputation.
3. Gender-neutral frameworks reduce misuse and bias.
4. Psychological well-being is operationally relevant.
5. Reform represents both a legal and cultural opportunity for the institution.

Conclusion: humane & modern military justice

Rebalancing discipline with dignity

The debate over adultery in the armed forces is not about excusing misconduct; it is about recognising that the military is made up of human beings, not automatons. A system that prioritises discipline but neglects dignity and privacy risks undermining its own legitimacy. Modern democracies have shown that armed forces can be both disciplined and humane — the two are not mutually exclusive.

Learning from the Supreme court’s constitutional morality

In Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court held that the criminalisation of adultery violates the constitutional values of privacy, dignity, and autonomy. While the judgment carved out an exception for the armed forces, it also set a benchmark for what a rights-based approach to intimate life looks like. The question today is not whether the armed forces should have discipline, but whether the form of discipline should reflect 1950s colonial morality or 21st-century constitutionalism.

Discipline is not moral policing

True military discipline rests on professionalism, leadership, and respect — not the criminalisation of consensual private conduct. When soldiers see that their institution treats them as adults, capable of privacy and autonomy, they are more likely to uphold standards voluntarily. This is the foundation of “mission command” and modern military leadership.

Why reform is a strategic imperative

• Operational Effectiveness: Soldiers under psychological stress from family crises are less effective in the field.
• Retention and Recruitment: A humane, modern institution attracts and retains talent.
• Global Reputation: India aspires to leadership among democracies; aligning military law with human rights strengthens that claim.

Cultural shift in the armed forces

Reforming adultery laws is also about reshaping institutional culture. The armed forces need to move from a model of paternalistic control to one of mutual respect. Officers and soldiers alike should see themselves not just as enforcers of rules but as guardians of each other’s dignity.

Why this matters to society at large

The armed forces are among the most respected institutions in India. Their approach to gender, privacy, and dignity sets an example for the rest of society. By modernising their stance on adultery, they can catalyse broader social reform, promoting empathy and fairness in family and workplace relations.

Discipline with humanity is strength, not weakness

Revisiting adultery laws in the armed forces is not about softening standards. It is about updating them to reflect our constitutional values, global practices, and the realities of military life.

A soldier who is respected as a human being   with a private life, emotions, and dignity  is a stronger, more loyal, and more effective defender of the nation.