Actor Imran Khan has filed a petition before the Bombay High Court challenging a notice issued by Mumbai's Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) that directs him to leave India no later than 28 October. In his formal response, Khan characterised the notice as lacking legal foundation, as being in violation of established law, and as running contrary to the constitution.
The defence team, headed by advocate Zulfikar Memon, is expected to seek an expedited hearing on Monday, 19 October. Through the petition, Khan asks the court to set aside the notice dated 14 October, on the grounds that it does not identify which provisions of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, he is accused of breaching.
Khan contends that the notice was issued without any prior opportunity for him to respond or present his case through a show-cause process. The petition states that the notice reached him on 15 October, with a departure deadline set for 28 October, and that nowhere in the notice are the particular legal clauses he is said to have violated named, nor does it set out what underlying material led authorities to issue the directive.
Khan's OCI status, conferred on him in 2006, has underpinned a life in India stretching back to when he was around two years old. Drawing on his schooling, career pursuits, and family ties rooted in India, the petition builds a case for his longstanding connection to the country.
In connecting the notice to an encounter near August Kranti Maidan and Nana Chowk in Mumbai on 10 October, Khan maintains that officers held him for a short period during that incident. According to his account, he was walking back to his car when journalists gathered around him and officers took him into custody, and he maintains that he neither entered any restricted or cordoned-off zone nor failed to comply with any police directive to move on.
According to the petition, Khan was brought to Yellow Gate Police Station alongside family members before being released. The document points to a First Information Report lodged at Gamdevi Police Station on 10 October under the provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Khan argues that the notice is tied to the FIR, even though no findings of guilt have been established against him. At the time the notice was issued, no chargesheet had yet been lodged and no formal charges had been drawn up, according to his account. In Khan's view, the measure goes beyond what is warranted and falls outside the legal protections applicable to his situation.
Among the objections put forward, the notice's timing and the surrounding circumstances draw particular scrutiny, including public calls directed at him. Two forms of relief are sought through the petition — annulment of the notice itself and access to the underlying documents and materials upon which the FRRO based its decision.
During the legal proceedings, Khan is seeking a court order that would shield him from enforcement steps, including removal, deportation, blacklisting, or any interference with his OCI registration.
