The Delhi High Court recently directed the passport authorities to remove the father's name from a minor boy's passport while considering a petition in favour his single mother.
The petitioner and her minor son had approached the high court seeking the deletion of the name of the father of the minor child from his existing passport or in the alternative and also sought re-issuance of a fresh passport to the minor child without the father's name.
According to the mother who filed the petition, the child was abandoned by his father before his birth and the child has been raised single-handedly by her.
What did the bench say?
Justice Prathiba M Singh observed, "In fact, this would be a case where the father has completely deserted the child."
The bench concluded that under such circumstances, the Court was of the opinion that Clause 4.5.1 of Chapter 8 and Clause 4.1 of Chapter 9 would clearly be applicable.
Considering the unique circumstances of this case, Delhi High Court directed that the name of the father of the child be deleted from the passport and the passport be re-issued in favour of the minor child without the name of the father.
Law supports passports issued without father's name
The court also added that both the Passport Manual and the OM relied upon by the Respondents recognise that passports can be issued under varying circumstances without the name of the father.
The bench pointed out that such relief ought to be considered, depending upon the factual position emerging in each case. No hard and fast rule can be applied.
"There are myriad situations in the case of matrimonial discord between parents, where the child's passport application may have to be considered by the authorities," the court said.
The stand of the petitioner's mother who appeared in person is that since she is a single parent and the father has completely abandoned the child, this is a case where the name of the father ought not to be insisted upon by the Passport Authorities, for being mentioned in the child's passport, the high court said in the judgement of April 19.
The petitioner had also relied upon the mutual settlement and the fact that the desertion took place even prior to the birth of the child.
