A senior official from India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) stated on Wednesday that an Indian passport should be viewed as a travel document rather than a citizenship document. The remark was made during an event marking the 14th Passport Seva Divas, which focused on the expansion of passport services across the country.
The statement sparked widespread discussion on social media, with many questioning the significance of a passport and wondering why the process of obtaining one involves extensive scrutiny if it is merely a travel document.
However, the position is not new. Government guidelines describe a passport primarily as an identity and travel document issued to a country's nationals, and various court rulings have also reflected this interpretation.
The debate has intensified because obtaining a passport in India requires substantial documentation, police verification, application fees, and multiple administrative procedures. While a passport serves as proof of nationality when an Indian travels abroad, officials clarified that it is not, by itself, a definitive document establishing citizenship.
This clarification has led to renewed questions about what constitutes proof of Indian citizenship and why passports are treated so seriously if they are not considered conclusive evidence of citizenship.
One frequently raised question concerns the requirement to surrender an Indian passport after acquiring foreign citizenship. Under the Citizenship Act, 1955, India does not permit dual citizenship. An individual who voluntarily acquires another country's citizenship automatically loses Indian citizenship. Continuing to possess or use an Indian passport thereafter is unlawful and may attract penalties under the Passports Act, 1967. The government maintains that surrendering the passport allows official records to be updated and enables the issuance of documents such as Surrender Certificates or Renunciation Certificates, which are often necessary for obtaining an Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) card or an Indian visa.
Another point of debate is the need for police verification before a passport is issued. Authorities argue that the process helps confirm an applicant’s identity, address, and background, while also preventing fraud, duplicate identities, and potential security risks. Nevertheless, many applicants consider the procedure cumbersome and intrusive, raising questions about why such extensive verification is required if the resulting document is described primarily as a travel document.
This concern was echoed by Aaditya Thackeray, who questioned what exactly police authorities verify before granting a passport and whether travel documents are also issued to non-Indians.
Interestingly, Indian law does allow passports or travel documents to be issued to non-citizens under exceptional circumstances. Section 20 of the Passports Act, 1967, empowers the Central Government to issue such documents to non-citizens if doing so is considered necessary in the public interest. These instances are rare and do not confer Indian citizenship upon the holder.
This provision has prompted further discussion about what a passport actually establishes if it can, in certain situations, be issued to someone who is not an Indian citizen. The prevailing view is that its primary function remains facilitating international travel rather than serving as definitive legal proof of citizenship.
Another aspect of the debate concerns ownership of passports. Unlike documents such as Aadhaar or PAN cards, passports are considered sovereign documents and remain the property of the Government of India under Section 17 of the Passports Act, 1967. The government argues that because passports represent the Indian state internationally and can be revoked, cancelled, or impounded, ownership must remain with the state.
Critics, however, argue that if a passport is merely a travel document, its surrender upon loss of citizenship and the government’s insistence on retaining ownership suggest that it carries greater significance than that description implies.
The discussion ultimately leads to a broader question: what document conclusively proves Indian citizenship?
India does not have a single universally accepted document that serves as absolute proof of citizenship in every circumstance. Citizenship is determined under the Citizenship Act, 1955, through birth, descent, registration, naturalisation, or incorporation of territory. Over the years, the law has undergone several amendments, including changes to citizenship by birth and the enactment of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019.
In practice, citizenship is often established through a combination of documents such as Aadhaar cards, voter identity cards, PAN cards, ration cards, passports, and other supporting records. No single document is universally recognised as conclusive proof in all situations.
Former Foreign Secretary Nirupama Menon Rao offered an explanation that many consider a balanced interpretation of the issue. She noted that a passport is issued only after the government has verified that an applicant is an Indian citizen. As a result, it serves as strong evidence of citizenship in everyday life and international travel. However, in a legal dispute specifically concerning citizenship status, the Citizenship Act remains the governing authority, and a passport is not treated as definitive proof that overrides all other evidence.
In essence, a passport is issued because the government has already satisfied itself that the holder is an Indian citizen. While it is therefore powerful evidence of nationality, it is not regarded in law as the final or exclusive determinant of citizenship.
