Imran Khan Challenges FRRO's Leave India Order in Bombay High Court, Cites Procedural Lapses
Actor Imran Khan has approached the Bombay High Court to challenge a Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) directive that requires him to leave India by October 28. In his petition, titled Imran Khan Pal v. Union of India & Ors., he has alleged that the order was issued arbitrarily and in violation of procedural safeguards that apply to Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cardholders.
The petition challenges the October 14 order, which was issued under Section 7(2)(c) read with Section 29 of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025. Khan has sought to have the directive quashed, an interim stay on its operation, and protection from coercive measures including deportation, a lookout notice, blacklisting, and any interference with his OCI status.
According to the plea, the authorities acted with undue haste after Khan was briefly detained during a protest demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. He was detained by Mumbai Police on October 10 in connection with the demonstrations and released the same day. The petition claims the expulsion directive was issued without an independent assessment of the circumstances and was allegedly influenced by social media campaigns involving political functionaries. Khan has argued that requiring him to leave the country after a brief detention is disproportionate, especially given his longstanding ties with India.
A key ground of challenge is that the notice allegedly fails to identify the specific statutory provision violated, the conduct that constitutes the alleged contravention, or the material on which the decision was based. The petition describes the directive as generic and non-speaking, arguing that the lack of specific reasons deprives him of a meaningful opportunity to respond. Khan has further contended that untested allegations relating to minor, bailable offences cannot by themselves justify directing him to leave India. He has highlighted that he has lived in the country for more than four decades and has held OCI registration since 2006.
The actor has also invoked Section 7D of the Citizenship Act, 1955, which sets out the legal framework for cancellation of OCI registration. According to the petition, this statutory scheme requires compliance with procedural safeguards, including a show-cause notice and a reasonable opportunity of hearing, before such registration can be cancelled. He has argued that the authorities cannot bypass these protections by issuing an expulsion directive without following the applicable legal process. The FRRO issued a separate show-cause notice on October 17, asking Khan to explain why his OCI registration should not be cancelled under Section 7D of the Citizenship Act.
The plea also relies on Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, which guarantee equality before the law and protection of life and personal liberty. Khan has argued that these constitutional protections extend to all persons within India's territory and that executive action affecting his continued stay must satisfy the requirements of fairness and due process. Besides seeking to quash the October 14 directive, he has urged the High Court to stay its operation and restrain the authorities from initiating coercive action while the matter is pending. He has also sought disclosure of the official records and material relied upon in issuing the order.
The actor is represented by advocates Zulfiquar Memon, Parvez Memon and Chirag Naik of MZM Legal. The matter is expected to be mentioned before a division bench comprising Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna on October 19.
Source: India Legal