Setting aside a ‘severe displeasure’ awarded to a Lieutenant Colonel for allegedly developing a relationship with a woman and entering into a plural marriage the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) has ruled that action cannot be initiated on the basis of interim findings of an inquiry where the complainant has failed to depose.“An incomplete court of inquiry (COI) cannot be relied upon for taking action against the delinquent individual and thus interim findings and interim opinion are illegal and deserve to be quashed,” the AFT’s Chandigarh Bench comprising Justice Sudhir Mittal and Lt Gen Ranbir Singh said in their order of March 18 while rapping a Lieutenant General for bias and failure to take into account all factors pertaining to the case.Also read: Promote superseded JCO retrospectively, reinstate him in Army: Armed Forces TribunalArmed Forces Tribunal puts Col Shrikant Purohit’s retirement on holdA Lieutenant Colonel from the Infantry had developed friendship with a woman, who introduced herself as a gemologist, in 2013 while travelling on a train for official purpose. The association continued and they met several times subsequently and travelled together.Allegedly, in June 2013, she called the officer and told him that she had accepted him as her husband, despite knowing that he was married and had a small son. She also told him that she had declared him as her husband before her aunt, who had transferred all her property in his favour in July 2013.In April 2015, the woman got an FIR registered against the officer under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code for rape, bigamy, breach of trust, dishonesty and fraud. The police however filed a cancellation report later which was accepted by the Court in January 2020.The matter had been brought to the notice of the officer’s Commanding Officer (CO), who contacted the woman and asked her to furnish details of the marriage and copy of the aunt’s will, but she remained indifferent.A one-man inquiry was ordered by the Brigade Commander, which did not find any wrong doing on the part of the officer as no proof had been produced. As the woman continued to make complaints against the officer to higher Army authorities, the Division Commander ordered a court of inquiry (COI) in April 2016, which in its interim findings opined that the officer had married the woman but the woman had failed to appear for cross-examination.The Bench observed that the contents of the Corps Commander’s orders of 14.09.2018, showed that Corps Commander had concluded before issuance of the show cause notice that the officer had violated accepted norms of morality and was culpable of other acts he was accused of.“This shows that the Corps Commander was biased and issuance of a show cause notice to the applicant was a mere formality. Award of punishment was a foregone conclusion. This is clearly violative of the principles of natural justice,” the Bench said.Holding the proceedings to be perverse, the Bench observed that despite six summons sent to the woman, she failed to appear before the COI. The officer was denied his procedural rights and findings have been recorded against him by taking into consideration the deposition of only one witness while the other witnesses did not say anything against the applicant.“In view of the stark illegalities pointed out hereinabove, the order dated 05.02.2019 awarding ‘Severe Displeasure’ (Recordable) is quashed. For the same reasons, the order dated 01.09.2022 passed by the Central Government cannot be sustained. It is also quashed,” the Bench ruled.“The punishment awarded to the applicant shall be wiped off from his service record, and the applicant would be entitled to all consequential service benefits as if the punishment had never been awarded,” the Bench directed.