New Delhi, June 25 (IANS) The Ministry of External Affairs on Thursday clarified that the passport has never been proof of citizenship, after a controversy erupted on the issue a day before.

It said this position has been there since the Passport Act came into force. It is not that it was decided in the last 12 years.

The ministry said a passport is mainly a travel document, and its legal status has remained unchanged for many years.

The issue gained attention after an MEA official said at a Passport Seva Divas event on Wednesday that a passport should primarily be understood as a document for travel.

That comment drew criticism from opposition leaders, lawyers, and commentators, who questioned how a document issued by the government after checks and verification could fail to establish citizenship on its own.

In response to the backlash, the MEA issued a clarification saying the position was not new and had nothing to do with the present government. It said Indian law has never treated a passport as final proof of citizenship.

“It was not decided yesterday that a passport is not proof of citizenship. It was not even decided in the last 12 years. The Passport has never been a proof of citizenship. The Passport Act, 1967 says that passports can be given to non-citizens,” the ministry said.

The ministry also pointed to judicial precedents, particularly a Bombay High Court judgment delivered in 2013, which held that possession of a passport alone does not automatically establish Indian citizenship.

“Judgments of the Bombay HC from 2013 have made it clear that a passport is not proof of citizenship. Please inform and educate your audience rather than amplify uninformed quips and commentary,” the MEA statement said.

The legal issue arises from the relationship between the Passports Act, 1967, and the Citizenship Act, 1955. Although a passport is issued by the government and generally reflects the holder’s nationality, citizenship is ultimately determined under the Citizenship Act. In some cases, a person may still face scrutiny over citizenship even if they possess a passport.

Section 20 of the Passports Act allows the Central Government to issue a passport or travel document to a non-citizen if it considers the action necessary in the public interest. This is an exception to the general rule that passports are issued to Indian citizens.

Again, Section 21 permits the government to delegate certain powers under the Act to officers, authorities, state governments, or Indian diplomatic and consular officials, subject to prescribed conditions.

The Bombay High Court’s 2013 ruling is often cited in this context. The court said that documents like passports, Aadhaar cards, and birth certificates can be important evidence, but they do not amount to unquestionable proof of citizenship. It stressed that citizenship must be examined according to the law made by Parliament.

The Supreme Court has also distinguished between identity documents and proof of citizenship in different cases. While it has recognised the value of documents such as Aadhaar for identification, it has made clear that such documents do not by themselves determine citizenship.

Courts have similarly held in several cases that when citizenship is disputed, the burden is on the individual to establish their status through documents such as birth records, family lineage papers, or naturalisation certificates, rather than relying only on a passport.

The MEA’s clarification has also triggered political reactions.

Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal asked what document ordinary citizens should rely on if a passport is not accepted as proof of citizenship. Public commentary also added to the debate.

Lyricist and commentator Javed Akhtar questioned the logic of the government’s position, saying authorities would normally verify nationality before issuing a passport.

The government’s position is that if citizenship is disputed, the matter must be decided under the Citizenship Act, not simply on the basis of possessing a passport.

Although the MEA says it is only restating an established legal principle, the episode has renewed public discussion about the difference between identity documents, travel documents, and legal proof of nationality in India.

–IANS

snj/skp