Justice N. Anand Venkatesh, Madras High Court
"Male Supremacism": Madras High Court Says Woman Doesn't Need Husband’s Permission Or Signature Before Applying For Passport
|The Madras High Court directed the Regional Passport Office to process a passport application from a married woman without insisting on her husband's signature.
The Madras High Court held that a wife doesn't need to get the permission of her husband or take his signature before applying for a passport.
The Court directed the Regional Passport Office to process a passport application from a married woman without insisting on her husband's signature in Form-J. The Bench expressed shock, stating that such a “practise is nothing short of male supremacism” after "the passport office is insisting for the permission of the husband and his signature in a particular form in order to process the application submitted by the petitioner for passport".
A Single Bench of Justice N Anand Venkatesh held, “The petitioner after marrying the above…does not loose her individuality and a wife can always apply for passport without the permission or signature of the husband in any form. The practice of insisting for permission from the husband to apply for passport, does not augur well for a society which is moving towards woman emancipation. This practise is nothing short of male supremacism.”
Advocate V.S. Usha Rani appeared for the Petitioner, while Central Government Counsel G. Subramanian represented the Respondents.
Brief Facts
The Petitioner had filed a Writ Petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to issue a fresh passport without insisting on a signature from her husband.
The Petitioner had applied for a passport, but the application was not processed. Upon enquiry, she was informed that she must obtain her husband's signature in Form-J for the application to be processed. The Regional Passport Office also took into consideration the pending matrimonial dispute.
Court’s Reasoning
The High Court stated that "the application submitted by the petitioner seeking for passport has to be processed independently." The Court found it "not necessary for a wife to get the permission of her husband and take his signature before applying for a passport before the authority".
The Court further held that "This insistence made by the 2nd respondent shows the mindset of the society in treating woman who are married as if they are chattel belonging to the husband".
Given that the relationship between the Petitioner and her husband is "in doldrums," the Court found the insistence to "virtually" be an expectation for the petitioner "to fulfill an impossibility".
Consequently, the Court ordered, “In the light of the above discussion, there shall be a direction to the 2nd respondent to process the application submitted by the petitioner and issue passport in the name of the petitioner on the petitioner satisfying the other requirements. This process shall be completed by the 2nd respondent within a period four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order.”
Accordingly, the High Court disposed of the Petition.
Cause Title: X v. The Government of India & Ors. (W.P.No.21709 of 2025)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocate V.S.Usha Rani
Respondents: Central Government Counsel G. Subramanian;.Government Advocate Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam