Chandigarh, August 31
A woman officer who had levelled allegations of physical and mental harassment against her superior officers last month now faces a possible trial by general court martial (GCM) for her alleged acts of professional impropriety, it is learnt.
Army sources revealed that a court of inquiry instituted into the allegations has held the complainant, Capt Poonam Kaur, blameworthy for disobedience of lawful command, wrongfully getting married accommodation allotted to her, unauthorised contact with the media and improper association with her driver.
Captain Poonam, posted with the 5682 ASC Battalion in Kalka, near here, had accused three of her seniors, her commanding officer Col R K Sharma, the unit’s second-in-command, Lt Col Ajay Chawla, and adjutant, Major Suraj Bhan, of harassing her over the past few months.
The Army had thereafter instituted a court of inquiry (COI) in the matter, which was presided over by Brig Attri, head of the EME Branch at Headquarters Western Command. Upon directions issued by the GOC-in-C, Western Command, on the COI, Captain Poonam has been attached to an armoured regiment in Patiala for commencement of disciplinary proceedings. She is expected to report there tomorrow.
Ordering disciplinary action initiates the process of convening a GCM, though the final decision in this regard would depend upon the outcome of subsequent proceedings like hearing of charge and recording of summary of evidence. There have been several instances in the past where the Army has initiated disciplinary or administrative action against erring woman officers, though so far the Army has convened only one GCM against a woman officer.
Her counsel, Col S.K. Aggarwal (retd), has termed the charges against her as false and baseless. He also alleged that her driver, Sep Sunil Kumar, with whom she is alleged to have illicit relations, has been kept in illegal custody and is being forced to implicate the officer.
According to the Army, on June 30, Captain Poonam was ordered to move to Pathankot for commanding one of the detachments of her unit located there but she sought deferment for the move citing personal reasons. When she was again instructed to move on July 11, she requested that she be permitted to leave on July 12, which was also agreed. However, she refused to go.
Thereafter, she had alleged harassment at the hands of her senior officers.
