BJP says passport alone is not proof of citizenship, rejects claims of new MEA rule
Citing the Passports Act, 1967, and court rulings, the BJP said the MEA has only reiterated a long-settled legal position, with Amit Malviya accusing the Opposition of creating a row
Rejecting claims of a new passport rule, the BJP on Thursday (June 25) said the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has merely reiterated the long-settled legal position that a passport alone is not conclusive proof of Indian citizenship.
The ruling party cited the Passports Act, 1967, and court rulings, including a 2013 Bombay High Court judgement, to argue that citizenship is determined under the Citizenship Act, 1955, and not by possession of a single document.
Also read | Passport row: If a passport isn't proof of citizenship, what is? Experts explain
The remarks came after a political controversy erupted over the MEA’s assertion that an Indian passport is primarily a travel document and not, by itself, proof of citizenship.
Malviya slams Opposition claims
BJP IT department head Amit Malviya attacked the Opposition, describing them as the “kagaz nahin dikhayenge” brigade and accusing them of sensationalising a settled legal position for political reasons.
"The MEA has not announced a new policy. It has merely reiterated a settled legal position," Malviya said on X. He said Indian courts have repeatedly held that a passport is not conclusive proof of citizenship and cited the Bombay High Court's 2013 judgement, saying the principle has been reaffirmed subsequently.
"Citizenship is determined under the Citizenship Act, 1955, based on eligibility and supporting evidence, not by the mere possession of a single document," he said.
Malviya said citizenship in India is established through a combination of records, including birth certificates, parents' citizenship records where relevant, school records, electoral roll entries, government service records, land and residence records, passports and other contemporaneous official documents.
BJP stresses legal distinction
Citing the Passports Act, 1967, he said the law itself empowers the Central government, in specified circumstances, to issue a passport or travel document even to a non-citizen.
"The law itself therefore recognises that possession of a passport cannot, by definition, be treated as conclusive proof of citizenship," he said.
Also read | Centre clarifies passport is not proof of citizenship, says position unchanged under law
"This distinction is neither unusual nor controversial. A passport is an important identity and travel document. It is evidence that may support a claim of citizenship. But citizenship itself flows from the Constitution and the Citizenship Act, not from the possession of any single government-issued document," he said.
"The outrage is not over a new rule. It is over a legal position that has long been settled by both statute and the courts," Malviya added.
(With agency inputs)