The Karnataka High Court has clarified that if one parent applies for a child’s passport and claims divorce or custody, they must submit proper documents. The Court directed issuance of passports after the father gave “No Objection”, subject to compliance with visitation rights.
for Child Passport Must Attach Divorce: The Karnataka High Court has made an important clarification regarding passport applications for minor children when only one parent files the request.
The Single Bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj said that whenever one spouse or parent makes a passport application for a minor child, the information provided must be factually correct, especially when the applicant claims they are divorced or have custody rights.
If such claims are made, the relevant documents must be attached with the application.
This ruling came while hearing two connected writ petitions filed by the mother on behalf of her minor daughter and son. She had approached the Court seeking a direction to the Passport Office to process the renewal and issuance of their passports within a fixed time. According to the case records, the parents were involved in a serious matrimonial dispute, and due to this, even the children got pulled into the conflict.
The Court explained:
“It would therefore be clear that, when an application is made by one spouse/parent the declaration which has been made should be factually correct and if at all, it is stated that a decree of divorce has been passed with custody being granted to the spouse making the application those documents need to be enclosed along with the application.”
The Bench acknowledged that when a husband and wife are fighting multiple legal battles, many orders may already exist, and the Court cannot pass proper directions unless both sides are heard. Initially, the father was not even made a party, but the Court insisted he be impleaded to ensure full transparency.
During the hearing, the father appeared through counsel and stated that he had no objection to the re-issuance of the minor daughter’s passport and issuance of the minor son’s passport—provided the mother complied with earlier visitation directions passed by the Family Court in G&WC No. 26/2023. The mother also filed an undertaking before the Court confirming that she would follow these visitation rules.
Later in the order, the Court recorded the following important observation:
“In the present case, now that the husband has come forward to offer his no objection for issuance of passport subject to compliance with the visitation rights as indicated supra, I am considered opinion that the respondents could be directed to issue the passport as per the said No Objection on part of respondent No.3-father, subject to the respondent No.3-father filing necessary declaration in terms of Annexure-D which learned counsel for respondent No.3 undertakes would be done within one week from today.”
Accepting this arrangement, the High Court allowed both petitions. It directed the Regional Passport Office to process the children’s applications once both parents file the mandatory Annexure-D declaration.
The Court also laid down a strong safeguard. It held that if any parent violates the conditions or the undertaking given, the Passport Office has full power to cancel, impound, or revoke the passport. The Court stated that the authorities may also initiate criminal proceedings under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and the Passport Act, 1967.
The final direction stated:
“In the event of any violation or non-compliance with the undertaking in Annexure-D, as contended in Annexure-D respondent No.2 could exercise its rights and powers and cancel/impound/revoke the passport so issued, on the basis of declaration/undertaking as also initiate such criminal proceedings as are permissible under the provision of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and the Passport Act, 1967.”
Explanatory Table Of All Laws & Sections Mentioned
| Law / Provision | What It Means (Simple Explanation) | Relevance in This Case |
| Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India | Article 226 gives High Courts power to issue writs. Article 227 gives supervisory powers over lower courts. | The mother filed writ petitions under these Articles seeking directions to the Passport Office. |
| Passport Act, 1967 | Law governing issuance, renewal, cancellation, and impounding of passports in India. | Court said the Passport Office can cancel or revoke a child’s passport if a parent violates the undertaking. |
| Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 | New criminal procedure code replacing CrPC. Deals with investigation, arrest, trial, etc. | Court said criminal action may be taken under BNSS if the parent breaches the undertaking filed with the passport application. |
| Annexure-C (Passport Rules) | Standard declaration form by parents for minor’s passport — includes marital status and custody details. | Mother claimed this form allowed her to apply without the father’s consent, but she had ticked the wrong option. |
| Annexure-D (Passport Rules) | Joint declaration by both parents for issuing a minor’s passport. | Court directed both parents to sign Annexure-D before the passport is issued. |
| G&WC No. 26/2023 (Guardianship & Custody Case) | Family Court case dealing with custody and visitation rights between parents. | Father gave No Objection for passport only if mother follows the visitation directions in this pending case. |
Case Title: Xyz vs Union of India & Others (WP No. 23848 of 2025 & WP No. 23851 of 2025)
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Suraj Govindaraj, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru Order dated 26 November 2025.
Counsels
| Party | Counsel(s) |
| Petitioners (Mother representing minor children) | Advocate Nagaraj R |
| Respondent No. 1 (Union of India) | CGC Aditya Singh / DSGI H. Shanthi Bhushan (appeared in connected matter) |
| Respondent No. 2 (Regional Passport Office) | Represented through CGC/DSGI |
| Respondent No. 3 (Father) | Advocate Amit Mandagi & Advocate Swathi Mandagi |
Case Facts
Who filed the petitions?
The mother, Mrs. Afreen, filed writ petitions on behalf of her:
- Minor son Abdul Ahad Azad (3 years old) — for fresh passport issuance.
- Minor daughter Inayah Hawwa Shahid (7 years old) — for passport re-issuance.
Why were their applications rejected?
Passport Office refused because:
- Annexure-C and Annexure-D were not properly attached.
- Annexure-D requires declaration by BOTH parents.
- Mother had wrongly claimed divorce and custody, without any such decree.
What was the dispute?
A matrimonial dispute was ongoing. Multiple legal proceedings existed. Children got dragged into the conflict. Initially the father was not made a party and Court insisted he be added.
What did the father say in Court?
He gave No Objection for both children’s passports if the mother followed visitation orders in G&WC No. 26/2023.
What did the mother submit?
She filed an undertaking dated 10.11.2025 promising to follow Family Court visitation directions.
She explained her form mistake as lack of education.
What did the Court finally order?
- Both writ petitions allowed.
- Passport Office must process both applications within 10 days once both parents sign Annexure-D.
- If the mother violates any condition, the Passport Office can:
- cancel / impound / revoke the passports, and even start criminal proceedings under BNSS 2023 & Passport Act 1967.
Key Takeaways
- High Court makes it clear that one parent cannot misstate facts like divorce or custody to push a child’s passport application; truth and documents are mandatory.
- Fathers must be heard before courts pass any order affecting their parental rights, especially in passport and custody-linked matters.
- Mother’s false declaration on divorce and custody was noted, but no punitive action only because the father did not press for it.
- Passport will be issued only after both parents sign Annexure-D, reinforcing that a father’s consent and involvement cannot be bypassed.
- Court empowers authorities to cancel or revoke the child’s passport and even take criminal action if the mother violates visitation rights or the undertaking.
This Could Change Your Case-Get FREE Legal Advice-Click Here!
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the Indian courts and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of “ShoneeKapoor.com” or its affiliates. This article is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The content provided is not legal advice, and viewers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Viewer discretion is advised.