IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2010 / 24TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 307 of 2010(K) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- SABIDA.K.M., D/O.MOHAMMED ALI, PULIMKUNNIL HOUSE, MALLOSSERY P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.P.MOHAMMED NIYAZ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI. 2. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, PASSPORT OFFICE, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.S.G OF INDIA FOR R1-2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.307/2010-K ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 14th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein applied for renewal of the passport which expired on 30/10/2008. The same stands rejected. She was originally married to one Shri Abdul Salam T.A and a passport was obtained showing his name as her husband. It is averred that the petitioner was divorced by pronouncing Talaq during the year 2004 and she is remarried to one Shri Pareeth Hashim on 24/01/2008. It is in these circumstances, the petitioner submitted Ext.P5 application for renewal of passport along with the required documents. 2. The application is rejected on the basis of the objection that an order from the competent authority is required in support of the plea of divorce. The petitioner relies upon Ext.P2 the Mutual Divorce Agreement and P3 Divorce Certificate issued by the Juma-ath. Ext.P4 is the copy of the marriage certificate of the petitioner and Shri Pareeth Hashim. The petitioner is relying upon the Judgment in W.P.(C).Nos.33729 & 34730/2008 rendered by this Court in similar circumstances. 3. After getting instructions on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2 a statement has been filed by the learned W.P.(C). No.307/2010 -:2:- Assistant Solicitor General. It is stated in paragraph (4) of the statement that if the petitioner approaches the second respondent with relevant documents such as Talaq and Joint Affidavit between the former husband and the petitioner along with the Passport Application, Passport can be issued after inclusion of the name of the remarried spouse. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it may not be possible for the petitioner to get the affidavit from the former husband. It is clear that the parties have divorced pursuant to the Talaq. In Ext.P9 Judgment at paragraph (5), this Court held thus:- “Authentication of divorce by competent court is one of the methods of proving a divorce or even the existence of a re- marriage. But it is not the only method. Divorce resultant upon a 'talaq' pronounced by her husband is a mode of divorce that is accepted in the Muslim Community. An affirmation of the state of affairs by a sworn affidavit in the form 'Annexure A' would suffice going by Clause 7 of Ext.R1 (a). It is affirmed that State Government does not propose to make any addition to W.P.(C). No.307/2010 -:3:- what is already mentioned as due procedure under Ext.R1(a).” Divorce by talaq is recognised by customary law governing Muslim Community. It need not be by a decree of divorce by a Court. Hence, insistence of an order from court in such cases cannot be correct. Ext.R2(a) Judgment is rendered on the facts of the said case only. 5. In that view of the matter, the course adopted by this Court in Ext.P9 Judgment can be adopted herein also. There will be a direction to the Passport Officer to proceed to issue the passport with corrections as sought for by the petitioner, provided she has complied with all the procedures and formalities. Regarding the insistence on the order of divorce, it is made clear that the Passport Officer shall not insist for an order from the Court for divorce in the light of Exts.P2 and P3. The petitioner will re-submit the application along with the required documents. On submission of the same, the second respondent will take appropriate action within a period of two weeks. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms