Srinagar, July 27, KDC: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed an appeal filed by a father who feared his estranged wife might take their minor child out of the country, ruling that his legal remedy against the issuance of a passport lies directly before the passport authorities rather than challenging a court direction that merely calls for administrative consideration of the mother’s application.
A Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Mohd. Yousuf Wani refused to condone a 31-day delay or grant leave to appeal against an April 18, 2026 judgment passed by a Single Judge in a writ petition filed by the mother.
The legal battle started when the mother, currently residing in Pune, Maharashtra, filed a writ petition through her attorney seeking directions to the Regional Passport Officer at Boulevard, Srinagar, to process an application for issuing a passport to her two-year-old child. The Single Judge Bench of Justice M. A. Chowdhary had disposed of the petition at the motion stage itself, directing the passport office to consider her pending representation expeditiously within four weeks.
Challenging the direction before the Division Bench, the father argued through his counsel that active matrimonial litigation was ongoing between the spouses. He expressed strong apprehension that the attempt to obtain a passport was aimed at relocating the minor child outside India without his knowledge or consent, contending that as the biological father, he could not be excluded from the process.
Dismissing the father’s application for leave to appeal alongside his plea for delay condonation, the Division Bench held that the Single Judge order did not decide or prejudice the substantive rights of either parent.
“We are of the opinion that the judgment, sought to be challenged by seeking leave to file appeal, does not determine the rights of the parties. The judgment only calls upon the passport authorities to consider the representation of respondent no. 1 for grant of passport in favour of her minor child,” the Division Bench observed.
Addressing the father’s apprehension regarding custody and international travel, the Court clarified that while he lacked the locus standi to challenge a routine judicial direction for administrative consideration, he remained fully entitled to present his objections directly before the executive authority.
“The grievance of the applicant before us seems to be that he being the father of the minor child cannot be kept out of loop in the matter for grant of passport… That apart, he being the father of the minor child is well within his right to approach the passport authorities and raise his grievance. We are sure that once such grievance is raised by the applicant, the same shall be addressed on the touchstone of the law governing issuance of passport,” the Bench ruled.
With the refusal to grant leave to appeal, the underlying Letters Patent Appeal stood formally dismissed.
In the Division Bench proceedings, advocate Bilal Ahmad Khan represented the applicant father, while Deputy Solicitor General of India (DSGI) R. M. Shamsi along with advocate Rehana Qayoom appeared for the Union Ministry of External Affairs and Regional Passport Officer. In the underlying writ proceedings before the Single Judge, advocate Aijaz A. Bhat had appeared for the mother. (KDC)
