Bombay HC extends stay on actor Imran Khan’s ‘Leave India Notice’, seeks unconditional apology over SIR protest

Imran Khan was detained by Mumbai Police near August Kranti Maidan on October 10 during a protest demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar | Photo Credit: Emmanual Yogini

The Bombay High Court on Monday (November 2, 2026) extended the suspension of a ‘Leave India Notice’ issued to actor Imran Khan, a U.S. citizen holding an Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) card, while directing him to tender an unconditional apology and submit an undertaking that he would not participate in future protests. The court allowed him to continue residing in India pending a decision by immigration authorities after allowing him to respond to the notice.

A division Bench of Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna was hearing Mr. Khan’s petition challenging the notice issued by the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO), directing him to leave India by October 28.

Mr. Khan was detained by Mumbai Police near August Kranti Maidan on October 10 during a protest demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. Following the incident, the FRRO issued the notice on October 14.

During the hearing, the Bench questioned Mr. Khan’s presence at the protest, observing that OCI cardholders could not claim the same rights as Indian citizens. The court also referred to his influence as a celebrity, noting that his public statements could have significant consequences.

Senior advocate Venkatesh Dhond, appearing for Mr. Khan, maintained that the actor had no association with the protest organisers and had approached the site merely out of curiosity. He submitted that Mr. Khan was stopped at police barricades and made a statement to the media while returning.

Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh, representing the Centre, disputed this account, alleging that Mr. Khan had been involved in protest-related activities from the beginning and had instigated people through social media posts and interviews. He argued that Mr. Khan’s claim of visiting the site out of curiosity was contrary to the material on record.

Singh further submitted that Khan, being a U.S. citizen, had no legally enforceable right to remain in India and that the government possessed extensive powers to take action against foreign nationals. He argued that OCI status did not confer rights equivalent to Indian citizenship.

The defence, however, pointed out that, Mr. Khan had spent nearly his entire life in India, barring two years in the United States, and had obtained OCI registration in 2006 after previously holding Person of Indian Origin status. Dhond also argued that the Leave India notice had been issued without allowing Khan to be heard.

The court questioned whether such action was warranted without first allowing Khan to respond, particularly considering his longstanding residence in India.

The bench also sought details of the FIR registered in connection with the protest. Advocate Dhond submitted that the alleged offences were bailable and that Mr. Khan had neither been summoned nor called for questioning.

During the hearing, Mr. Khan’s counsel offered to submit an undertaking that he would not participate in any future protest or directly or indirectly influence others to do so. The court also sought an unconditional apology for any inadvertent participation or statements made in connection with the agitation.

While acknowledging the Centre’s powers concerning foreign nationals, the Bench observed that Mr. Khan’s circumstances warranted an opportunity to respond to the notice.

The court consequently continued the suspension of the ‘Leave India Notice’ until the FRRO decides the matter after considering Mr. Khan’s response. The matter has been listed for further hearing on December 7.

Published - November 02, 2026 06:21 pm IST