Supreme Court Holds Allottees Who Elected RERA Remedy Cannot Subsequently Seek Interim Relief Under Section 9 Arbitration Act Lodging FIR Does Not Amount To Instigation: Supreme Court Quashes Section 306 IPC Case Against In-Laws Over Husband's Suicide Vigilant Citizen Deserves Acknowledgment: Supreme Court Sets Strict Timelines For 20-Year-Old Subway Project, Lauds Litigant's Relentless Legal Battle Lawyer Cannot Disclose Privileged Information On TV Even If Client Becomes Adversary: Supreme Court Upholds Suspension Of Advocate Rizwan Siddique, Slaps ₹5 Lakh Cost On Both Parties Supreme Court Modifies 3-Year Bar Practice Rule; Orders 1-Year Practice Coupled With 2-Year Academy Training & Clerkship Model Made A Scapegoat Under Pressure Of Public Outcry: Delhi High Court Acquits Man Sentenced To Life In POCSO Case Doctrine Of Lis Pendens Applies To Court Auctions; Purchaser Bound By Outcome Of Pending Specific Performance Suit: Allahabad High Court Andhra Pradesh High Court Rules Section 65B Evidence Act Objection Cannot Be Raised For First Time In Appeal Two-Month Time Limit To File Evidence Under Rule 45 Of Trade Marks Rules 2017 Is Mandatory; Non-Compliance Results In Deemed Abandonment: Madras High Court SEBI Act | Special Law Overrides General Law': Bombay High Court Quashes Police FIR Against Ex-Axis Mutual Fund Chief Dealer In Front-Running Case 'Truth Cannot Be Sacrificed At The Altar Of Rigid Timelines': Calcutta High Court Upholds Section 311 CrPC Powers At Any Stage For Just Decision 'A Dispute Does Not Cease To Be Criminal Merely Because It Involves Commercial Transaction': Chhattisgarh High Court Refuses To Quash Cheating FIR In ₹4.39 Cr Land Deal Holding In Designated Centres Only Way If Foreigner Cannot Be Expelled: Gauhati High Court Denies Bail To Declared Foreigner Who Illegally Re-Entered India Madras High Court Issues Guidelines Against Police Harassment Under Guise Of Enquiry, Mandates Written Summons Under Section 179 BNSS Grave Ramifications On Rights': Punjab & Haryana High Court Mandates Strict Compliance Of Section 82 CrPC Before Declaring Accused As Proclaimed Person 'Interacting With Father Benefits Child's Well-Being': Kerala High Court Grants Virtual Access To Father After Mother Takes Child Abroad Violating Restraint Order Agreement In Family Member’s Name Cannot Shield Occupants Under Section 53-A TP Act': Uttarakhand High Court Upholds Eviction Of Licensees Not Filling A Lacuna: Subsequent Forensic Report From Criminal Case Can Be Produced As Additional Evidence In Civil Suit: Punjab & Haryana High Court Mere Nomination In FIR Not Enough For Vicarious Liability: Allahabad High Court Acquits Murder Accused Under Section 149 IPC Demanding Separations From Depending In-Laws Constitute Mental Cruelty: Calcutta High Court Upholds Divorce Human Memory Not Photographic: Allahabad High Court Upholds Murder Conviction, Reiterates 'Falsus In Uno' Maxim Has No Application In India

Lack of Consent from a Non-Custodial Parent is Not a Material Consideration for Passport Grant” – Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Minor’s Passport Impoundment

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment dated April 30, 2024, the Calcutta High Court has set aside the impoundment of a minor’s passport amidst a custody dispute, observing that the “lack of consent from a non-custodial parent is not a material consideration for the grant of a passport.”

The legal crux revolves around whether the absence of consent from a non-custodial parent constitutes ‘material suppression of information’ sufficient to warrant the cancellation of a minor’s passport under Section 10(3)(b) of the Passports Act, 1967. The court held that such consent or lack thereof is not a material factor affecting the passport issuance, thus not justifying the impoundment of the passport.

The case emerged from conflicting writ petitions (WPA No. 7360 of 2024 and WPA No. 8033 of 2024) filed by the parents of a minor following their marital discord and subsequent custody battles. The mother, Dr. Agnidipa Das, contested the Passport Authority’s decision to impound her daughter’s passport, which was allegedly based on her failure to disclose the father’s consent. Conversely, the father, Ranajoy Dutta, sought documentation from the Passport Authority and advocated for penal measures against the mother under the Passports Act, alleging suppression of material facts.

Violation of Natural Justice: The court pointed out that the Passport Authority’s actions violated principles of natural justice, notably ‘Audi Alteram Partem’, as the mother was not adequately heard before impounding the passport.

Material Suppression Not Established: Justice Bhattacharyya ruled that there was no material suppression of information as the requirement for the father’s consent was not a ‘material’ necessity for passport issuance.

Legal Implications of False Information: It was established that the mere non-disclosure of the co-parent’s consent under the circumstances did not constitute a material information breach warranting passport cancellation.

The High Court allowed WPA No. 7360 of 2024 filed by Dr. Agnidipa Das, setting aside the order impounding her daughter’s passport. Concurrently, WPA No. 8033 of 2024 filed by Ranajoy Dutta was dismissed, affirming that no material suppression had occurred and the Passport Authority’s decision lacked substantial grounds.

Date of Decision: April 30, 2024

Dr. Agnidipa Das Versus Union of India and Others  

Latest Legal News