The Bombay High Court will hear actor Imran Khan’s challenge to a ‘Leave India Notice’ issued by the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO), which has directed the US citizen and Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cardholder to leave India by October 28. The court has listed his plea for October 26, two days before the deadline. Khan was detained on October 10 near Mumbai’s August Kranti Maidan amid a protest demanding Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar’s resignation over the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
The FRRO subsequently issued the notice on October 14, alleging a violation of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025. Khan denies participating in the protest and argues that he was stopped before reaching the demonstration. His lawyers have called the notice “unconstitutional”, “arbitrary” and issued without giving him an opportunity to be heard. The court has also directed him to add the Maharashtra government as a party to the case.
Protest Led To Action
The controversy stems from October 10, when Khan was detained by Mumbai Police near August Kranti Maidan along with other people amid a protest linked to the Cockroach Janta Party’s (CJP) wider agitation against CEC Gyanesh Kumar. The demonstrators were demanding his resignation, citing concerns surrounding the SIR exercise. Khan has maintained that he did not go there as a political organiser or as a member of any organisation.
In his petition, he said he was stopped before reaching the protest and later detained, while questioning restrictions on freedom of movement and people’s ability to voice their concerns. Khan’s lawyers have also said that he has no criminal antecedents and has lived in India since he was two years old.
Complaint Triggered Notice
Following the detention, BJP leader Kirit Somaiya complained to Mumbai Police, questioning whether a US citizen holding an OCI card could participate in a political protest in India. The complaint was subsequently brought to the attention of the FRRO, the authority responsible for regulating the stay, movement and departure of foreign nationals.
The FRRO issued the Leave India Notice on October 14, asking Khan to leave India by October 28 and citing an alleged violation of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025. Somaiya has argued that Khan, despite being a foreign national, was engaging in political activity in India. Khan’s legal team disputes this characterisation and says the notice does not adequately establish what specific legal violation he committed.
OCI Status Under Scrutiny
The Leave India Notice is separate from another action concerning Khan’s OCI status. The FRRO has issued a show-cause notice asking why his OCI registration should not be cancelled under Section 7D(e) of the Citizenship Act, 1955. Khan’s lawyers argue that the authorities acted without first giving him a proper opportunity to explain his position.
Legal experts have also pointed out that OCI cardholders remain foreign nationals and do not have exactly the same legal position as Indian citizens, although there is no express provision in the Immigration and Foreigners Act stating that an OCI cardholder cannot attend every public protest. The government nevertheless has broad powers to regulate the presence and conduct of foreign nationals in India.
Khan Challenges Order
In his petition before the Bombay High Court, Khan has described the FRRO notice as “arbitrary, unreasoned and wholly misconceived”. His lawyers have argued that the order violates principles of natural justice because he was not given a hearing before being directed to leave the country. They have sought quashing of the notice and an interim stay on its implementation.
The petition also invokes constitutional protections including equality under Article 14 and the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21. Khan has further denied having any association or affiliation with organisations involved in the protest.
Court Seeks Clarification
During Monday’s hearing, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna agreed to hear the matter on October 26.
The judges asked whether Khan had any criminal antecedents, to which his counsel replied that he had none. The bench also directed that the Maharashtra government be added as a respondent, observing that the matter involved a local issue. Khan’s senior counsel Venkatesh Dhond sought an earlier hearing because the FRRO’s deadline falls just two days after the scheduled hearing, but the court indicated that October 26 would be appropriate.
Deadline Adds Urgency
The timing of the hearing is significant because the October 28 departure deadline falls only 48 hours after the court is scheduled to hear Khan’s plea. The High Court has listed the case but has not, at this stage, granted interim relief against the FRRO notice. Unless the authorities withdraw or modify the order, or the court provides protection, the October 28 deadline remains in place.
The case could therefore determine whether Khan is required to leave India while his wider challenge and the separate proceedings concerning his OCI status continue.
The Legal Question
At the heart of the dispute is the balance between the government’s authority to regulate foreign nationals and the procedural safeguards that should accompany an order requiring someone to leave the country. Khan has spent most of his life in India despite holding US citizenship, while the government maintains regulatory powers over his status as a foreign national and OCI cardholder.
The court will now have to consider the circumstances in which the FRRO issued the notice, the alleged connection between Khan and the protest, and whether the process followed was legally sufficient. The hearing does not itself determine whether Khan violated immigration law; that question remains before the court.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
The case goes beyond a celebrity being asked to leave the country. It raises important questions about due process, peaceful political expression and how immigration powers should be exercised. While foreign nationals and OCI cardholders are subject to different rules from Indian citizens, any serious action affecting a person’s ability to remain in a country should be transparent, reasoned and open to meaningful legal scrutiny.
At the same time, public demonstrations should remain peaceful, and disagreements over political institutions should be addressed through dialogue rather than confrontation. As the Bombay High Court examines Imran Khan’s challenge, how should India balance its immigration powers with fairness, due process and the space for peaceful expression?
Also Read: India’s Lokesh Subramani Wins Malaysia Squash Junior Open U-17 Title, Beats Home Challenger 3-0
