Former Solicitor General of India Harish Salve said an Indian passport is widely accepted as proof of citizenship despite being a travel document [1].

The discussion follows a political controversy sparked by the Ministry of External Affairs, which clarified that passports are primarily travel documents rather than ultimate legal proof of citizenship [2]. This distinction has triggered a nationwide debate regarding the legal standards used to verify nationality in India [2].

During an interview with NDTV, Salve addressed the tension between the administrative purpose of the document and its practical application. He said, "My passport is proof I'm an Indian citizen" [1]. However, he also acknowledged the technical nature of the document, saying, "A passport is fundamentally a travel document" [1].

Salve noted that the validity of such documents depends on the integrity of the application process. He said any document can be scrutinized or revoked if obtained through false records [1]. This suggests that while a passport serves as a primary indicator of citizenship for most people, it does not provide absolute immunity from government review if fraud is suspected [1].

The disagreement highlights a gap between the Ministry of External Affairs' legal stance and the general public's reliance on passports for identification [1, 2]. While the government emphasizes the document's role in international travel, legal experts like Salve point to its pervasive use as a surrogate for citizenship certificates in daily administrative life [1].

“"My passport is proof I'm an Indian citizen."”

The tension between the Ministry of External Affairs' definition and the practical application of passports creates a legal gray area. If the government strictly treats passports as travel documents rather than citizenship proof, it could potentially simplify the process for revoking citizenship or challenging the status of individuals based on the records used to obtain the passport.