Single Parent Entitled to Minor’s Passport Without Ex-Spouse’s Consent Under Article 21 and Passport Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court - 2026-05-01

Breaking the Deadlock: AP High Court Upholds Single Parent’s Right to Obtain Minor’s Passport

In a significant judgment emphasizing the constitutional right to travel, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh has ruled that a single parent is entitled to apply for and receive a passport for their minor child without the consent or signature of the estranged other parent. Justice Battu Devanand, presiding over a writ petition filed by a mother residing in the SPSR Nellore District, underscored that the procedural requirement for dual-parent consent cannot be used to impede a child's fundamental rights.

The Background: A Struggle for Documents

The petitioner, Shaik Shabana, had approached the High Court after the Regional Passport Office in Vijayawada refused to process her minor daughter's passport application. Despite the petitioner explicitly declaring her status as a single parent and providing the necessary Annexures (C and D), the authorities insisted on production of divorce decrees or specific judicial separation orders.

The mother, who has been living separately from her husband since 2022, is currently engaged in legal battles involving criminal allegations against her husband under sections 420, 498A, and the Dowry Prohibition Act. Highlighting the absurdity of the situation, the petition stated that because she is a natural guardian and the child is in her exclusive care, the denial of a passport—based solely on the husband’s lack of consent—constituted an arbitrary administrative hurdle.

Arguments of the Parties

• The Petitioner: Argued that she is the natural guardian for the child and that the Passport Act and its associated rules offer clear provisions for situations where a parent is unavailable or estranged. She contended that the authorities’ refusal violated her and her daughter’s fundamental rights under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution.
• The Respondents: The Regional Passport Office maintained that standard guidelines require the consent of both parents for a minor’s passport. They argued that because the petitioner failed to provide supporting legal documents validating the absence of the father's consent, the application remained in limbo.

Legal Analysis: The Right to Travel

The Court navigated the controversy by relying on a robust trend of judicial precedents across the country. Referring to the Bombay High Court's decision in Miss Yushika Vivek Gedam and the Telangana High Court’s ruling in Zayanab Aaliyah Mohammed , Justice Devanand observed that federal passport rules are intended to facilitate, not frustrate, the rights of citizens. The court emphasized that the Passports Act, 1967 does not contain any statutory provision that explicitly mandates dual-parent signatures under all circumstances, especially when a parent is a single, sole guardian.

Key Observations

The judgment offers a scathing critique of mechanical bureaucratic adherence to guidelines over constitutional mandates:

• "It is well-settled that the expression 'personal liberty' which occurs in Article 21 of the Constitution includes [the] right to travel abroad and no person can be deprived of that right except according to the procedure established in law."
• "The Act does not prohibit a single parent from applying for a passport for his/her minor child."
• "Any action of the Passport Authority in denying the passport would have severe consequence not only adversely affecting the applicant in a given situation, but it may cause irreparable harm to the prospects of the applicant."
• "The right to travel is required to be not only recognized but made more meaningful. This can be achieved and supported by the authorities implementing the provisions of the Passport Act."

Court’s Decision: A Victory for Parents

The High Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the arbitrary refusal of the passport authorities. The court directed the Regional Passport Officer to finalize and issue the passport within two weeks of receiving the order, noting that the petitioner had already fulfilled the requirement of submitting the necessary declarations.

This decision serves as a beacon for single parents across India, reinforcing the principle that internal matrimonial conflicts between parents should not be allowed to act as a barrier to a child’s right to international mobility. By prioritizing the lex loci (the law of the land) and constitutional spirit over restrictive administrative guidelines, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has reinforced that in modern family dynamics, the rights of the child and the custodial parent must take precedence.