Imran Khan Leave India Notice: the Bombay High Court on Tuesday orally remarked that the challenge concerns a civil consequence and that it saw no criminality attached, while hearing the actor’s plea against the Foreigners Regional Registration Office notice.
Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Tuesday, October 27, 2026, took up actor Imran Khan‘s writ petition against a Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) notice directing him to leave India by October 28, and, responding to an objection on whether the matter belonged on the criminal side, orally remarked that the case involved a civil consequence with no criminality attached. The hearing was paused briefly after the Additional Solicitor General sought time for the Solicitor General [Imran Khan Pal v. Union of India and Others].
The composition of the Bench for Tuesday’s hearing was not stated in the courtroom updates. When the petition was first mentioned on October 19, it was heard by a Division Bench of Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna. Senior Advocate Venkatesh Dhond appears for Mr. Khan. Advocate Subhash Jha also addressed the Court, and the Union was represented by the Additional Solicitor General.
What happened in Court
At the outset, Mr. Dhond objected to an intervention application filed in the matter and questioned why an intervenor was needed at all. Mr. Jha told the Court that one of the objections raised concerned whether the petition ought to be heard on the criminal side. The Bench asked whether the Additional Solicitor General had raised any such objection and said it could send the matter to the Registry for verification.
The Court then made its view on the nature of the case clear, observing:
This is a civil consequence. We do not see a criminality attached to this.
When the Additional Solicitor General sought time so that the Solicitor General could appear, the Bench allowed a short break, saying “10 mins”.
How the case reached here
Mr. Khan, a United States national, has held Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) status since 2006, according to his petition. On October 10, 2026, he was briefly detained by Mumbai Police near August Kranti Maidan and Nana Chowk during a demonstration seeking the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, linked to the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) agitation. He was taken to Yellow Gate Police Station with family members and later released. An FIR under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita was registered at Gamdevi Police Station the same day; the petition says no chargesheet had been filed and no charges framed when the notice was issued.
The FRRO notice, dated October 14 and received on October 15, directs him to leave India by October 28, on the basis that he took part in the protest. Mr. Khan denies entering any restricted area or disobeying police directions, and his side maintains that he was neither an organiser of nor a participant in the protest. His team has said that after the petition was filed, the FRRO also issued a show-cause notice asking why his OCI registration should not be cancelled over his presence at the October 10 gathering.
ALSO READ: Bombay High Court: Actor Imran Khan To Challenge Notice To Leave India By October 28
On October 19, the Division Bench agreed to hear the petition, declined an earlier date sought by Mr. Dhond, granted no interim relief, listed the matter for October 26 so that the FRRO could take instructions, and asked the petitioner to implead the State of Maharashtra, calling it a local matter. The hearing was then deferred from October 26 to Tuesday, a day before the deadline in the notice.
What the petition argues
The petition contends that the notice does not specify which provisions of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025 Mr. Khan allegedly violated, does not identify the material relied on, and was issued without a show-cause notice or an opportunity of being heard. It calls the action disproportionate and points to the timing and public calls for action against him. Among the reliefs sought are protection from coercive steps, including removal or deportation, blacklisting and any action affecting his OCI registration, while the case is pending.
The legal position
An OCI card does not confer Indian citizenship; it gives the holder a lifelong, multiple-entry visa and certain other benefits. Section 7D of the Citizenship Act, 1955 allows the Central Government to cancel OCI registration on specified grounds, but only after the cardholder is given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The petition turns on whether the authorities may instead direct an OCI cardholder to leave the country under the general powers over foreigners. The authorities have taken the position that foreign nationals should not take part in political protests; their detailed reply in this case is not yet on record.
ALSO READ: Bombay High Court Lists Actor Imran Khan’s Plea Against Leave India Notice For October 26
What comes next
The hearing was to resume after the short break for the Solicitor General. The Court’s remark was an oral observation on whether the matter belongs on the civil or criminal side, and not a ruling on the validity of the notice. No view on the merits has been expressed, the allegations against Mr. Khan remain untested, and he is entitled to the presumption of innocence in the FIR.
Case Title: Imran Khan Pal v. Union of India and Others
Court: Bombay High Court
Date of Hearing: October 27, 2026
Appearances: Senior Advocate Venkatesh Dhond for the petitioner; Additional Solicitor General for the Union of India; Advocate Subhash Jha also addressed the Court