Bollywood actor Imran Khan has filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court challenging a notice directing him to leave India by October 28, calling it “unconstitutional” and alleging an abuse of power.
The 44-year-old actor, nephew of Bollywood star Aamir Khan, filed the petition on Saturday against the Leave India Notice (LIN) issued by the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) on October 14. The notice followed his alleged participation in a protest against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar near Mumbai’s August Kranti Maidan on October 10.
Khan has asked the court to quash the notice and order an immediate stay on its operation and implementation while his petition is being heard.
Get updated faster and for FREE: Download the Gulf News app now - simply click here.
Why Imran Khan calls the notice ‘unconstitutional’
In his petition, Khan described the notice as “non-bonafide” and alleged it involved a “high-handed and grossly disproportionate abuse of power”.
He argued that the statutory powers under the Immigration and Foreigners Act (IFA), 2025, could not be used to punish a public figure merely for being near a protest site or expressing concern about restrictions on freedom of movement.
The actor also alleged that the action had implications beyond his own case, saying it could undermine confidence among the Indian diaspora in the US in the certainty of the Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) regime.
The petition further argued that removing a foreign national without due process could raise concerns for the country whose citizen was affected.
Khan cites OCI status and right to remain in India
Khan, a US citizen who says he has lived in India since the age of two, argued that the FRRO had treated him merely as an American national while overlooking his OCI status under the Citizenship Act, 1955.
He contended that his OCI registration carries a statutory right of residence in India and that he could not be expelled without due process. The petition also alleges a violation of his rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Khan claimed the notice referred to Sections 7(2)(c) and 29 of the IFA, 2025, but did not cite any adverse security report. He also questioned the FRRO’s jurisdiction to order his removal, arguing that the restrictions at the protest site had been imposed by local police and that the location was not a prohibited site notified by the central government.
According to the petition, Khan was returning to his car when he was apprehended after media personnel gathered around him. He said he had no association or affiliation with any organisation involved in organising the protest and alleged that authorities had ignored CCTV footage relevant to the incident.
These are claims made in the petition and have not been established by a court.
FRRO issues show-cause notice
The FRRO on Saturday also issued Khan a show-cause notice asking why his OCI registration should not be cancelled under Section 7D(e) of the Citizenship Act, 1955.
The provision allows the central government to cancel OCI registration on specified grounds, including national security, sovereignty and integrity, relations with foreign countries or the interests of the general public, subject to a reasonable opportunity for the person concerned to be heard.
Khan has been directed to respond within 15 days. The notice warns that if he does not submit an explanation within the stipulated period, authorities may presume he has nothing to say and proceed with appropriate legal action.
How the Mumbai protest led to the notice
Khan was detained by Mumbai Police on October 10 after going near August Kranti Maidan, where demonstrators were demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over allegations of electoral irregularities. The Election Commission and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) have rejected the allegations.
In his petition, Khan said he went to the area out of curiosity about the student protests. He stated that when police told him the area was restricted, his “curiosity ended” and he complied with their directions.
The petition disputes the allegation that he incited a crowd and maintains that he was not involved in organising the demonstration. He was later allowed to leave.
BJP leader and former MP Kirit Somaiya had filed a complaint alleging that Khan, a US citizen and OCI cardholder, violated the law by participating in the protest. Following an FIR forwarded by police, the FRRO issued the Leave India Notice on October 14.
Advocates Zulfiquar Memon, Parvez Memon and Chirag Naik of MZM Legal are expected to seek an urgent hearing before a division bench led by Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi on Monday.
The court is being asked to consider Khan’s challenge to the notice and his request for an immediate stay.
With inputs from ANI and IANS