AFT declined to stay administrative proceedings over alleged extramarital affairs and directed the officer to respond to the showcause notice (Image generated using AI).The Chief of Army Staff has issued a showcause notice to terminate the service of a major of the 11 Armoured Regiment, currently attached to 23 Grenadiers, over alleged extramarital affairs with the wives of two other Army officers.The notice, dated August 10 and issued under Army Rules 19 and 14, asks why his services should not be terminated administratively because trial by court-martial is inexpedient due to “attendant circumstances”.According to an original application filed before the Armed Forces Tribunal (Principal Bench, New Delhi), the proceedings stem from a written complaint his then-wife lodged in August 2023 with the Additional Directorate General (Discipline and Vigilance), Integrated Headquarters of the Ministry of Defence (Army).The AFT petition, filed through advocate Anand Kumar and Associates, sought to scrap the showcause notice and obtain related reliefs. The AFT refused to stay the proceedings against the officer. Disposing of the application filed by the Major on October 14, the AFT bench of Justice Rajendra Menon and Lt Gen CP Mohanty directed that the officer should raise his grievances in his reply to the showcause notice.The bench also directed the Army authorities to supply the officer with a copy of the court of inquiry findings, along with a copy of the proceedings of the hearing of charge, as he sought.Explained | Divorce, maintenance and punishment in armed forces: How is adultery still relevant in law?The complaint against the Major alleged flagrant adultery, substance abuse, neglect, and extramarital relationships with four women, including two wives of brother officers.Headquarters 55 (I) Mechanised Brigade convened a Court of Inquiry in October 2023 to examine allegations of “stealing affection of brother officers’ wives” and conduct unbecoming of an officer and a gentleman.Story continues below this adAdditional Courts of Inquiry were later ordered. The officer contends that the inquiries violated mandatory provisions of Army Rule 180, as the named women and their husbands were not summoned or examined despite repeated requests. He also alleged irregularities in seizing digital devices (mobile phones, laptop, pen drives) and searching his married accommodation.The Army framed a tentative chargesheet under Sections 45 and 63 of the Army Act in March 2025. Summary of Evidence and additional Summary of Evidence proceedings followed, during which the officer again requested that the women be summoned.Also Read | Armed forces should have mechanism for action against personnel for adultery: Supreme CourtThe Army subsequently opted for administrative action via the showcause notice instead of a court-martial. In his petition before AFT, the Major stated that he and his ex-wife obtained a mutual divorce on March 30, 2026, by order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Anantnag (Jammu and Kashmir). In the memo of compromise, she withdrew her August 2023 complaint, stating it had been filed unintentionally amid matrimonial disputes and without undeniable grounds, and undertook to tender a statement before the authorities.The officer argued that the showcause notice, based on earlier inquiry and evidence proceedings that he claims are vitiated, is therefore illegal. He also sought copies of the Court of Inquiry findings and opinion (under Army Rule 184) and the Hearing of Charge proceedings (under Army Rule 22), which he says have not been supplied.