The elusive proof

The passport controversy reveals a reality that has become impossible to ignore: there is no single document serving as definitive proof of Indian citizenship

- KANU SARDA

Satish Gupta never imagined he would one day question something as fundamental as his citizenship.

Born in Uttar Pradesh, the 62-year-old has voted in every election since he turned 18. He retired from a government department after nearly three decades of service. He has a PAN card, an Aadhaar card, a voter ID and a passport that has taken him to Singapore, Dubai and London. His taxes are up to date, his pension arrives in his bank account every month, and his grandchildren often joke that he has more government-issued documents than they do.

So when he read reports that the Union government had told a court that a passport is not conclusive proof of citizenship, he was stunned. “If my passport doesn’t prove I am an Indian, then what does?” Gupta wondered.

It is a question millions of Indians probably never imagined they would have to ask.

The recent clarification by the ministry of external affairs before the Bombay High Court that a passport is essentially a travel document and not definitive proof of citizenship has exposed a little-known reality about India’s legal framework: despite being home to more than 1.4 billion people, the country still has no single, universally accepted document that conclusively establishes Indian citizenship. The controversy has also revived an old, unfinished idea—issuing multipurpose national identity cards (MNICs).

Unlike many countries that issue a dedicated citizenship certificate or national identity document, India relies on a patchwork of records. A passport, Aadhaar, voter ID, birth certificate, domicile certificate, school records, naturalisation papers and electoral rolls all serve different purposes. None of them, by itself, conclusively answers every legal question relating to citizenship.