Government's own documents call passport citizenship proof

On June 24, 2026, at the 14th Passport Seva Divas, a Ministry of External Affairs official stated that a passport is not a document of citizenship but merely a travel document. This statement came at a critical time when the Election Commission is conducting a Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls across 16 states and 3 Union Territories, with over 3.94 lakh Booth Level Officers verifying citizenship of millions of voters. Previously, government records treated the passport as citizenship proof, but the Centre now argues that possession of a passport is not conclusive evidence of Indian citizenship.

The Probe has found that the same government, in its own live application forms, statutory rulebook, passport manual, and the Citizenship Act, contradicts this claim. The Ministry of Home Affairs' OCI portal lists "Copy of present valid passport" as the first document under "Proof of present citizenship." The same portal states that an Indian passport is given only to an Indian citizen, directly contradicting the MEA's stance.

The MEA's own passport application process requires a sworn citizenship declaration before issuing a passport. Annexure 'E' is a declaration that the applicant must sign, affirming Indian citizenship under oath. A false statement invites criminal prosecution. Additionally, the Passport Manual explicitly states that a passport can be used as proof of citizenship.

The Citizenship Act also defines the passport as evidence of citizenship. Section 4 of the Act requires the submission of a passport for citizenship applications. This legal provision directly contradicts the government's recent statement. The contradiction between the government's laws and its practices creates confusion among citizens.

This situation creates significant uncertainty for millions of Indians who need to prove their citizenship during the electoral roll revision. While the passport was previously considered sufficient proof, the government's current stance may disenfranchise voters. Experts warn that this contradictory approach could lead to legal and administrative challenges.