Bombay HC keeps 'leave India' notice to actor Imran Khan in abeyance till 2 November; no coercive steps

The order is an interim one. It does not decide whether the notice was lawful, and the government is free to defend it on 2 November. The assurance given by the Additional Solicitor General means that, for the time being, the authorities will not start any deportation proceedings or take other steps against Khan.

The notice and the law

Khan, who is 43 and a nephew of actor Aamir Khan, is a citizen of the United States and holds an Overseas Citizen of India card. The authorities say the departure order was issued under Sections 7(2)(c) and 29 of the Immigration and Foreigners Act. The first lets the government restrict the presence of a foreigner in India, and the second allows removal for violating the Act or related rules, or after an adverse security report. If Khan had not left by 28 October, deportation proceedings could have begun under Section 29.

He has also received a show-cause notice from the Foreigners Regional Registration Office, which asks why his Overseas Citizen of India status should not be revoked. That is a separate process, and Tuesday's order, as reported, deals with the leave-India notice.

How it began

On 10 October, Khan was briefly detained at a protest at August Kranti Maidan in Mumbai. The protest was in solidarity with demonstrations in Delhi that demand the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. The Mumbai authorities then issued the notice. Khan moved the High Court on 17 October.

His petition, filed through advocate Zulfikar Memon, calls the notice illegal, arbitrary, perverse and drastic. He says that he did not take part in any gathering and had no link to the organisers of the protest. He asks the court to quash the notice, to stay its operation while the case is pending and to bar the authorities from taking coercive action. One account of the petition adds that he was given only 14 days to leave the country, without a prior inquiry, a show-cause notice or an opportunity to present his case, though another report of the hearing does not mention that point.

The court will hear the matter on 2 November. The government will have to explain what Khan is said to have done, whether it amounts to a violation of the law for a foreigner, and why he was not given a hearing before the notice was issued. Khan will have to show that the notice was made without application of mind, as he claims.

The case has two parts that could be decided separately. The first is the notice to leave India, which is the one now in abeyance. The second is the move to cancel his Overseas Citizen of India status, which could follow its own course. If the court finds against the government on the first, the second may still go ahead, and the reverse is also possible.

For the film industry and for others who attend protests, the case is being watched as an example of how far the law on foreigners reaches. Overseas Citizens of India have a lifelong right to live and work in the country, but they are not citizens, and the law allows the government to act against them for certain reasons. The question for the court is whether presence at a political protest, if it is established, is one of them.

For Khan, the order gives him at least another week in the country, and the time to prepare a fuller argument. The matter will come back on 2 November.