Trial Courts Must Award Just Compensation In POCSO Cases Beyond Fine Amounts; Interim Payment No Reason To Deny Final Relief: Madras High Court Section 482 CrPC Power Not For Conducting 'Mini-Trial'; Disputed Facts Must Be Adjudicated At Trial: Allahabad High Court Right To Walk On Demarcated Footpaths Is A Fundamental Right; Municipal Authorities Under Enforceable Duty To Provide Pedestrian Infrastructure: Supreme Court Right To Walk Is A Fundamental Right Under Articles 19(1)(d) & 21; Priority Over Motorised Vehicles: Supreme Court Municipal Commissioner Is Disciplinary Authority For All Employees Post-1993 Amendment; Existing Regulations Can't Fetter Statutory Power: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Force Plaintiff To Accept Monetary Compensation Instead Of Removal Of Encroachment Without Prayer: Supreme Court Recruitment Merit Is Not A Vested Right; Public Interest Justifies Disclosing Marks Of Candidates Outside Selection Zone: Supreme Court Special Police Establishment Not An 'Intelligence & Security Organisation', State Cannot Exempt It From RTI Act: Supreme Court Medical Practitioner Not Negligent Merely Because Result Was A Failure If Procedure Adopted Was Acceptable To Medical Science: Calcutta High Court Long Service Cannot Be Denied Regularization On Mere Technicalities If Appointment Wasn't Illegal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejection Of Nomination Paper Can Only Be Challenged Through Election Petition; Article 329(b) Bars Writ Jurisdiction: Supreme Court NI Act | Benefit Of Presumptions Under Sections 118 & 139 Not Available If Complainant Lacks Direct Knowledge Of Transaction: Kerala High Court Landowners Entitled To Solatium Under National Highways Act; Failure To Grant Is Ground To Challenge Award Under Section 34: MP High Court Transfer Policy Only Broad Guideline, Not Enforceable Under Article 226/227 In Absence Of Mala Fides: Rajasthan High Court

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