The Rajasthan High Court has directed the passport authority to issue a passport to a minor child, observing that merely because the father's consent was absent from the application, his constitutional right to go abroad cannot be violated. 

The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand observed;

"The future and career of the petitioner cannot be allowed to remain dependent upon the wish, will and desire of one of his parents. The valuable constitutional right of the petitioner cannot be prejudiced and must not be allowed be taken away, merely because the consent of his father is not there on the application for getting passport. The petitioner cannot be compelled to approach his father to get his consent on the said application". 

A minor filed a petition through his mother seeking issuance of appropriate directions to the passport authority for issuance of a passport to him. Per the petitioner, he has submitted an application for issuance of a passport, but the same was refused by the authorities on technical grounds that the consent of the father was missing from the application. 

The counsel for the petitioner informed the court that the parents had obtained a divorce decree in 2022. The petitioner further submitted that the father is not interested in the domestic affairs of the petitioner, and thus it is not possible for him to obtain his father's consent. The petitioner wished to travel abroad to study for a better future. 

The counsel appearing for the Passport authority submitted that, per Annexure C, it is mandatory to get the consent of either the mother or the father in case the parents are residing separately and the said parent has custody. 

The counsel also argued that the said divorce decree was unclear regarding the custody of the petitioner, and therefore, the consent of both parents would be needed in such circumstances. 

The court, examining the divorce proceedings, recorded that the petitioner was in the custody of his mother. The bench also noted that the father had not filed any application seeking his custody under the Guardians and Wards Act, and therefore the mother is the lawful guardian of the petitioner. 

Examining the materials placed on record, the bench noted that the petitioner has passed the Secondary School Examinations with "flying colours", and therefore his application to study abroad cannot be declined. 

The bench highlighted, "Now, for a better future and career, he wants to study abroad and for the purpose of going abroad, passport is required because passport is a singular document which enables a citizen to cross international boundaries and travel to other countries. In the absence of such singular document, i.e. passport, any incumbent is an alien to a foreign country". 

The bench reiterated that the right to personal liberty conferred under Article 21 of the Constitution also includes the right to travel abroad. The right to travel abroad is an integral facet of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 

The bench clarified, "Therefore, even if one of the parents of a minor child refuses to give consent, then also the passport issuing authority can still issue a passport to a minor, provided Annexure-C is submitted". 

Additionally, the court elucidated that travelling abroad to study further for the betterment of the future is not a "fanciful affair but has became an essential requirement of modern life". 

The bench further noted that unless the present of the children is fine and taken care of, how would their future become bright? The bench also emphasized that a child's right to go abroad for the betterment of his future career cannot be allowed to be ruined merely in the absence of the father's consent.

The bench directed, "Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the instant writ petition is liable to be and is hereby allowed. The respondent-passport authority is directed to issue a passport to the Petitioner forthwith without any further delay". 

Case Title: Riddham Deora v Union of India, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17014/2026

For Petitioner: Advocate Rahul Soni

For Respondents: Advocate Navneet Singh Birkh

Click here to read/download the Order