Even as External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj continues to reach out to people and win hearts with her cool and witty responses on Twitter, a series of tweets on Wednesday unmasked the insensitive face of one of her staff at Lucknow Passport Office.
Even as External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj continues to reach out to people and win hearts with her cool and witty responses on Twitter, a series of tweets on Wednesday unmasked the insensitive face of one of her staff at Lucknow Passport Office.
An inter-faith couple was allegedly humiliated by Senior Passport Superintendent Vikas Mishra over the so-called discrepancy in the name of the wife. Tanvi Seth and her husband were insulted at the Lucknow passport Office at Ratan Square in heart of Uttar Pradesh. Mishra not only told them that their passports won’t be made, he also asked Mohammad Anas Siddiqui to take ‘pheras’ so that their 12-year-old marriage can be ‘accepted’.
Seth narrated her ordeal on the micro-blogging site. Tagging Swaraj, the young professional said that, ‘I had never ever imagined that in a place like passport office we would have people who are moral policing the citizens. My passport was put on hold by Mr Vikash Mishra because I married a Muslim and not changed my name ever. He spoke to me very rudely and was loud enough for others to hear. I have never felt so harassed in the last 12 years of my marriage.”
Understandably, this sparked a major outrage with Swaraj demanding a report and the authorities suspending and transferring Mishra to Gorakhpur.
Though, the case has come to its rightful conclusion with Tanvi and her husband getting their passports, some on the social media have been saying that the passport officer was right on his part as there was a discrepancy of name in documents submitted by the woman.
Here are four key reasons that will show you how Mishra and the trolls got the issue wrong:
1: Nikahnama is not a marriage certificate
Vikas Mishra, the officer in question, has rejected charges against him saying that he only followed the inter-faith marriage security procedure rules. “My objections were on documents she had submitted of Tanvi Seth while her name in Nikahmanama was mentioned as Shadia Anas. It was my duty to inquire in the difference of documents as it could pose a hreat to national security,” clarified Mishra. However, Mishra may not be aware that though Nikahnama is a document that has two witnesses and sign of Qazi, but it is not a marriage certificate. The Special Marriage Act 1964 says registration is must for an inter-faith Nikah for issuance of certificate from registrar of marriages. So, Nikahnama is not a valid document. Hence, harassing the woman over the different name in the Nikahnama is just wrong.
2: When husband already has a passport, there’s no point in harassing the wife
The passport of Tanvi Seth’s husband Mohammad Anas Siddiqui was to be renewed. That means that the passport authorities already had the records. If the woman is quoting her husband’s passport number, why must she be humiliated for marrying a Muslim or for that matter anybody? Senior passport officials also Mishra’s clarifications. “A married woman can keep her original name as per passport rules and under the new rules her husband’s passport was the only document required to allow her application,” said a senior passport officer to DNA.
3: Power of the Indian Constitution
Just in case, Mr Vikas Mishra has forgotten, Article 25 of the Indian Constitution grants freedom to every citizen of India to profess, practice and propagate their own religion. The Constitution, in the preamble, professes to secure to all its citizen's liberty of belief, faith and worship. Article 25(1) also allows every citizen to freely follow his own religion subject to public order, morality and health. Officers, who serve the nation, would do well to remember this.
4: The New Rule
Under the new rule, only an application is taken from the couple in inter-faith marriage to declare their marriage in case one of them is retaining original name. If the name was the only problem then Mishra could have asked for a self-attested application from Tanvi and Anas that would have solved the issue amicably.
(With additional inputs by Srawan Shukla in Lucknow)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Mohammad Anas Siddiqui and Tanvi Seth PTI")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}