The Bombay High Court has agreed to hear a plea filed by actor Imran Khan challenging a 'Leave India Notice' (LIN) issued by the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO). The notice requires the actor to depart India by October 28. The matter came before a bench comprising Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait M Sethna on Monday, following a request for an urgent hearing.
The legal action stems from an event on October 10, when the actor participated in a protest against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar in Mumbai. Subsequently, the FRRO issued the LIN on October 14, citing an alleged violation of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025. Counsel representing the actor, senior advocate Venkatesh Dhond, argued that Khan has resided in India since he was two years old and received the notice without any prior show-cause process or opportunity for a hearing.
During the proceedings, advocate Dhond contended that the actor had merely attempted to attend a protest, was stopped midway, and returned home. He further argued that the actor holds no prior police record. The legal team, which includes advocates Zulfiquar Memon, Parvez Memon, and Chirag Naik of MZM Legal, has challenged the notice as being “unconstitutional, manifestly arbitrary and disproportionate,” seeking an immediate stay on its implementation alongside a request to quash the directive.
The controversy reportedly gained momentum following a complaint filed by BJP leader Kirit Somaiya, who alleged that Imran Khan, identified as a US citizen and Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cardholder, had breached the law. In response to the filing of an FIR, the FRRO issued the departure notice. The actor has claimed that the authority acted specifically on the timeline of a political functionary.
Addressing the timing of the court date, the bench noted that it would list the matter for October 26, allowing the respondents time to provide instructions. The bench also directed that the state government be added as a party to the case, noting the local nature of the events. While the actor’s counsel expressed concern that the October 26 date was close to the October 28 deadline, the court maintained the scheduled date for the hearing.
Parallel to the challenge against the LIN, the FRRO issued a separate show-cause notice to the actor on Saturday. This additional notice states that his registration as an OCI cardholder may be subject to cancellation under Section 7D(e) of the Citizenship Act, 1955. The legal proceedings in the High Court will be a critical development in determining the validity of the government’s directive.
As the October 26 hearing approaches, the legal debate continues to centre on the proportionality of the immigration action taken against the actor. The court is expected to review the circumstances surrounding the protest and the subsequent regulatory response, which has now expanded to include potential questions regarding the actor's long-term residency status in India.
Comments