Passport not proof of citizenship, says govt. Why it shouldn't come as surprise
In the past few months, few questions have been more unsettling than what constitutes Indian citizenship. It again came to the forefront on Wednesday, after
In the past few months, few questions have been more unsettling than what constitutes Indian citizenship. It again came to the forefront on Wednesday, after the Centre clarified what has been known for long - your passport, among the most rigorously verified documents, is not proof of your citizenship. To me, it didn't come as a surprise. Neither should it to those 10% of Indians who currently possess a passport. Read Full Story Over the years, several courts and the government have settled the issue: a passport is merely a travel document that helps you establish your nationality abroad. It is vastly different from citizenship. "A passport is largely an identity and travel document issued to the state's own nationals," the government's passport manual states. WHY AREN'T PASSPORTS PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP? It raises a pertinent question. If passports can only be issued to Indian citizens, then why isn't it proof of citizenship? The answer is more unsettling than the question, as the Passports Act, 1967, does not tackle the question conclusively. See this. As per Section 6(2)(a) of the Passports Act, authorities are mandated to refuse to issue a passport if the applicant is not a citizen of India. But, Section 20 of the Passports Act mentions that the government can issue a passport to a "non-citizen" if it is deemed to be in "public interest". Moreover, possessing a passport does not mean that it is owned by you. A note on the back flap of passports mentions that it is the "property of the government" and shall be surrendered if and when the government so orders.
Thus, it clearly establishes that possessing an Indian passport is not, as per the law, conclusive proof of citizenship. It has been there in the law for decades, and has also been settled by courts. However, what the government and the courts have not settled is the citizenship conundrum. WHAT GOVT, COURTS HAVE SAID ON PASSPORTS? In 2013, the Bombay High Court said a birth certificate, passport or even an Aadhaar card might not be enough to prove you are an Indian citizen if you were born after July 1, 1987. The court subsequently refused to grant relief to a man and three others who were accused of being illegal immigrants. The prosecution said the accused were Bangladeshis who entered India illegally. The setback came even after the accused produced passports, Aadhaar cards and birth certificates to prove they were Indian citizens. "A birth certificate may show that a person was born in India, and other documents may show that they have lived in India. But the law does not recognise that as proof of citizenship," the additional public prosecutor argued. More recently, in the Babu Abdul Sardar vs the state of Maharashtra case, the Bombay High Court categorically said citizenship questions must be examined under the Citizenship Act, 1955, and cannot be resolved solely by reference to "identity documents" such as Aadhaar, PAN or voter ID cards. "The Citizenship Act is the main and controlling law for deciding questions about nationality in India today," the High Court said. Thus, the Centre, on Passport Seva Divas on June 25, just reiterated the legal position on passports and citizenship.
The BriefWire