The Madhya Pradesh High Court, in a landmark ruling, emphasized that a father’s consent is not mandatory for renewing a minor’s passport if the mother, acting as the natural guardian, provides a valid declaration. The court clarified that such a process could only be hindered by a prohibitory order from a competent court.
The judgment came in the case of Devyani Nitish Bharadwaj and Another v. Union of India and Others (Writ Petition No. 403 of 2025), presided over by Justice Vinay Saraf.
Background of the Case
The petitioners, minor daughters of respondent No. 3, Mr. Nitish Janardan Bharadwaj, applied for the renewal of their passports through their mother, Mrs. Smita Nitish Bharadwaj. The Regional Passport Office, Bhopal, rejected the application, citing objections raised by the father, who alleged an ongoing custody dispute in the Family Court, Mumbai.
Mrs. Bharadwaj sought legal recourse, highlighting that the children were academically distinguished and required valid passports to participate in cultural and academic programs abroad, including Bharat Mahotsav at the University of Oxford in February 2025.
Key Legal Issues
1. Right to Travel as a Fundamental Right:
The petitioners’ counsel, Senior Advocate Naman Nagrath, argued that the right to travel abroad is a facet of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India had earlier held that any restriction on this right must follow fair, reasonable, and just procedures.
2. Applicability of Annexure-C Declaration:
Mrs. Bharadwaj submitted a declaration under Annexure-C of the passport rules, which permits a single parent to renew a minor’s passport without the other parent’s consent, provided no court has issued a prohibitory order.
3. Father’s Objection:
Mr. Bharadwaj opposed the renewal, alleging fabricated documents and expressing concerns about potential international relocation of the children. He also cited the ongoing custody battle in the Family Court as a basis to deny passport renewal.
Court’s Observations
Justice Vinay Saraf, delivering the judgment, underscored:
– No Absolute Requirement for Consent:
“The Passport Rules do not prohibit the issuance or renewal of a minor’s passport in the absence of the father’s consent, provided the mother complies with the prescribed declaration under Annexure-C.”
– Protection of Fundamental Rights:
The court reiterated that the right to travel abroad is integral to Article 21. “Traveling abroad is no longer a fanciful luxury but an essential requirement in modern life, especially for academic and cultural pursuits.”
– Safeguards Against Misuse:
The court allowed Mr. Bharadwaj the liberty to approach the Family Court for a prohibitory order, should he substantiate allegations of fabricated documents or potential misuse.
Final Directions
1. The court quashed the impugned communication from the Passport Office, Bhopal, dated November 8, 2024.
2. It directed the Passport Office to renew the passports of the petitioners within one week, relying on the mother’s declaration.
3. The father was granted the right to seek further legal remedies in the Family Court without being influenced by the present judgment.
