Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

The Bombay High Court on January 08, 2025, observed that a minor cannot be denied a passport solely due to the non-consent of the father. The case revolved around the issuance of a passport to a minor whose father refused to grant consent, while the mother had applied for the passport on behalf of the child.

The court, presided over by a Division bench of Justice G.S. Kulkarni and Justice Advait M. Sethna, observed: “in the contemporary times traveling abroad cannot be considered to be a fanciful affair but has became an essential requirement of modern life. Such need to travel which may be the requirement of a child, a student or an employee, professional or a person from any other strata of the society, has undergone a monumental change. Thus, the right to travel is required to be not only recognized but made more meaningful. This can be achieved and supported by the authorities implementing the provisions of the Passport Act by effectively recognizing such contemporary needs in dealing with passport applications.”

The court’s observation came while addressing a case where the Passport Authority refused to re-issue a passport to a minor girl selected to visit Japan for an educational event sponsored by her school. The refusal was based on the father’s written objection, arising from an ongoing marital dispute with the girl’s mother.

The bench strongly criticized the Passport Authority's reliance on the father’s objection while ignoring the mother’s consent, which was duly submitted under Annexure C of the passport application form. The court noted that Annexure C permits a single parent's consent for issuing or re-issuing a minor’s passport, rendering the father’s objection under Annexure D inconsequential in the case.

“The present case is an example of a student being given an opportunity to undertake a study tour by visiting a foreign country. Any action of the Passport Authority in denying the passport would have severe consequence not only adversely affecting the applicant in a given situation, but it may cause irreparable harm to the prospects of the applicant, for any venture she or he intended to undertake. Thus, a mechanical approach in this regard by the Passport Authority cannot be countenanced,” the court said.

The court further noted that disputes between parents must not obstruct the fundamental rights of children enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It stated, “in our opinion, considering the well-settled position in law, it cannot be that the petitioner’s right to travel abroad by issuance of a passport can in any manner be scuttled and/or taken away by denying her a passport to be issued/re-issued merely for the reason that the father for the only reason that he has disputes with the mother, is not supporting the petitioner’s application by consenting to it.”

With these observations, the court directed the Passport Authority to re-issue the passport to the petitioner within two weeks, facilitating her participation in the study tour to Japan.

 

Cause Title: Yushika Gedam vs Union of India (Writ Petition No. 19042 of 2024)

Appearance: Advocate Balasaheb Ligade for the petitioner; Advocate Shehnaz Bharucha for the Passport Authority.