New Delhi | Election Commission officials on Thursday said that Indian passports continue to be among the 12 valid supporting documents required by voters to prove their eligibility to be on the voters' list under the ongoing special intensive revision of electoral rolls.
They were responding to a query following a controversy that arose after the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) stated that a passport is not proof of citizenship, referencing the Passport Act of 1967.
Government sources have underlined that a passport has never been considered proof of citizenship, and there has been no new policy regarding this document implemented by the Modi government in the past 12 years.
During the Bihar SIR, Assam's special revision, and subsequent phases of poll roll revision, passports have consistently been listed as one of the 12 documents that individuals can submit when applying to register or maintain their status on the electoral rolls.
"Passport was and continues to be one of the documents to establish identity," an official said, underlining that "there is no change."
The electoral registration officer examines one of the indicative documents to decide whether a person is eligible to be on the voters' list.
New Delhi | The BJP on Thursday asserted that the government has not introduced any new rule regarding passports, saying the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has merely reiterated a long-settled legal position that a passport alone is not conclusive proof of Indian citizenship.
The ruling party cited the Passports Act, 1967, and judicial rulings, including a 2013 Bombay High Court judgment, to contend that citizenship is determined under the Citizenship Act, 1955, and not by the possession of any single document.
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.
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 judgment, 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.
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.
"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.