India's Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) recently triggered widespread public debate after reiterating that an Indian passport should primarily be treated as a travel document and not as conclusive proof of Indian citizenship. The clarification, issued on the occasion of the 14th Passport Seva Divas, drew strong reactions on mainstream and social media, with many questioning the legal and practical implications of the statement.
The discussion centered on a fundamental question: if a passport—issued only after prescribed verification procedures—is not definitive proof of citizenship, what document establishes Indian citizenship? The controversy also revived discussions about whether India may eventually require a comprehensive citizenship register or another formal mechanism for certifying citizenship.
Under Indian law, citizenship is governed by the Citizenship Act, 1955, while passports are issued under the Passports Act, 1967. Citizenship may be acquired through birth, descent, registration, naturalization, or incorporation of territory, as provided by the Constitution and relevant legislation. Most Indians acquire citizenship by birth and are never issued a separate citizenship certificate. India also does not maintain a universal citizenship certificate for all citizens.
Although fewer than ten percent of India's population possesses a passport, it has long been regarded as one of the country's most reliable identity documents. However, the Passports Act permits the issuance of passports to certain non-citizens under specified circumstances. Consequently, legal experts have noted that possession of an Indian passport alone does not automatically establish citizenship in every case.
The MEA's clarification also renewed attention to the status of other government-issued documents. Successive governments have maintained that documents such as Aadhaar, PAN, driving licences, and voter identity cards are not, by themselves, conclusive proof of Indian citizenship. This has prompted renewed public discussion over whether India may eventually require a dedicated citizenship document or a nationwide update of the National Register of Citizens (NRC). The government, however, has not announced any fresh nationwide NRC exercise.
The NRC was originally prepared in 1951 following the national Census but has not been updated across India. Assam remains the only State where the register underwent a comprehensive updating exercise between 2015 and 2019 under the supervision of the Supreme Court of India.
The Assam NRC exercise sought to identify illegal immigrants using 25 March 1971 as the cut-off date. Of the 33.03 million applicants, approximately 1.91 million people were excluded from the final draft published on 31 August 2019. The exercise involved more than 50,000 government employees and around 6,000 contractual workers and reportedly cost about ₹1,600 crore.
Despite being conducted under Supreme Court supervision, the NRC exercise has remained contentious. The final list has yet to be formally notified by the Registrar General of India (RGI), and both the Union and Assam governments have acknowledged concerns regarding its accuracy.
Former Assam NRC State Coordinator Hitesh Dev Sarma publicly alleged procedural irregularities during the updating process, including alleged weaknesses in software systems and verification mechanisms such as Family Tree Matching. He sought investigations by central agencies into these issues. While many of his complaints remain pending, subsequent findings by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) identified significant financial irregularities in the implementation of the project.
In its audit report for the year ending 31 March 2020, the CAG reported financial irregularities amounting to approximately ₹260 crore during the NRC updating exercise. The audit also recommended appropriate legal action wherever warranted and identified lapses involving the system integrator, Wipro Ltd., and project implementation.
The CAG also observed discrepancies in payments made to temporary data entry operators (DEOs). According to the audit, while DEOs received monthly payments ranging from ₹5,500 to ₹9,100, substantially higher amounts were paid to the system integrator. The audit recommended further examination of contractual and financial arrangements to determine accountability.
Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma has repeatedly stated that the existing NRC contains significant errors and has supported a comprehensive re-verification before any final acceptance. Petitions seeking 100 percent re-verification of the NRC are presently before the Supreme Court, which has issued notices to the Union Government, the Assam Government, the State NRC authorities, and the Registrar General of India.
The continuing legal proceedings indicate that the Assam NRC remains an unfinished exercise. Any future consideration of a nationwide NRC or another citizenship verification mechanism is therefore likely to draw upon the administrative, legal, and financial lessons emerging from Assam's experience.
Against this backdrop, the MEA's recent clarification on the legal status of passports has intensified public debate over how Indian citizenship should be documented and verified. While the ministry's statement reflected the existing legal position, the widespread public reaction demonstrated the sensitivity of citizenship-related issues and highlighted the absence of a universally accepted document that conclusively establishes Indian citizenship for every citizen.
---
*Senior journalist based in Guwahati
Comments