Legal representatives for actor Imran Khan told the court that he was travelling through Nana Chowk in Mumbai at the time and had no involvement in the gathering against the Chief Election Commissioner that took place at August Kranti Maidan on 10 October.
The statement followed an order from the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) requiring the actor — a US passport holder and Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cardholder — to depart the country by 28 October over an alleged breach of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025.
Lawyers representing Khan are set to bring the matter before the Bombay High Court, contesting both the order itself and the claim that their client took an active part in the protest.
Zulfiquar Memon, who is part of the MZM Legal LLP team alongside Parvez Memon and Chirag Naik and is handling the actor's case, told reporters that the defence intends to obtain CCTV recordings from the surrounding area, arguing that such footage would account for Khan's whereabouts at the time of the incident and bring clarity to the matter.
Defence lawyers stated that Khan happened to be travelling through the Nana Chowk area at a time when police had set up barricades limiting movement there, and that journalists then approached him at that location. The defence team argues that the video recording bears directly on the question of his participation in the demonstration.
Police in Mumbai took the actor into custody for a short period on 10 October, during a protest, before letting him go. Charges were filed against Khan and other demonstrators on the grounds that the gathering had taken place without the necessary official authorisation.
A formal complaint lodged by Kirit Somaiya, who previously held a parliamentary seat under the BJP banner, put the matter into dispute — the allegation being that Khan's US citizenship rendered his presence at a protest against government policy improper.
The gathering at August Kranti Maidan pursued a dual purpose: calling for the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar from his post, and aligning itself with a parallel protest movement in Delhi — one that the Bharatiya Janata Party had been organising against the CEC.
A formal notice from the FRRO, grounded in Sections 7(2)(c) and 29 of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, set an October 28 deadline for Khan to depart the country. Kadam, who holds the Minister of State for Home portfolio in Maharashtra, put forward a justification for the action, pointing to the obligation on foreign nationals to abide by the terms governing their presence in the country.
Tushar Gandhi, who organised the Mumbai rally under the banner of Hum Bharat Ke Log, voiced opposition to the measures taken against the actor.
At the heart of Khan's forthcoming legal action lies a challenge to the grounds on which the departure notice was issued, with his defence team aiming to show he was moving through the area rather than taking part in the demonstration. The defence attorneys' submissions stand to be assessed against the body of evidence on record.