‘India is my home’: Imran Khan seeks relief as Bombay High Court questions his role in SIR protest

MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court strongly criticised actor Imran Khan over his participation in a protest against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The court questioned why Khan, a US citizen and Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cardholder, had taken part in the demonstration linked to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The bench observed that he was not remotely affected by the SIR and had no connection with the issue. It also made clear that merely filing an affidavit would not suffice and insisted that he tender an unconditional apology.

Imran Khan subsequently tendered an unconditional apology before the court and gave an undertaking that he would not participate in similar protests in the future. The court observed that the rights enjoyed by Indian citizens and OCI cardholders were different and that OCI cardholders could not claim the same rights as Indian citizens. It also drew a comparison with the United States, observing that if an Indian citizen participated in a protest in another country, such as the US, that person could be sent back to India on the next available flight. The bench further remarked that Imran Khan could go to the US and participate in protests there, but such participation in India would not be tolerated.

The court also questioned why Khan, who had been living in India for decades without participating in protests, had chosen to join this particular demonstration. It asked him to clarify whether he had attended the gathering specifically to participate in the protest or for some other purpose, reiterating that he could not claim all the rights available to Indian citizens.

Appearing for the Centre, government counsel argued that Imran Khan was an American citizen and had no legally enforceable right to participate in protests in India. The counsel maintained that the rights and benefits available to him as an OCI cardholder were different from and more limited than those enjoyed by Indian citizens. The government also pointed out that Imran Khan had considerable influence on social media and alleged that he had participated in the demonstration despite being aware of its objectives and purpose.

Following these submissions, the lawyer representing Khan, senior advocate Venkatesh Dhond, tendered an unconditional apology on his behalf and gave an undertaking that he would not participate in protests in the future or instigate others to do so.

Telling the court that he had close ties with India, Imran Khan said he had spent almost his entire life in the country, having moved here from the United States at the age of two. He described India as his home and said his child, family, professional commitments and personal life were all based here. He urged the court to allow him to continue living in India.

Imran Khan was detained by Mumbai Police on October 10 in connection with a protest against Gyanesh Kumar near August Kranti Maidan in Mumbai. The demonstration was held in solidarity with protests demanding the Chief Election Commissioner's resignation over the SIR exercise. Following the incident, the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) issued a 'Leave India' notice on October 14, directing the actor to leave the country by October 28. Challenging the notice, Imran Khan approached the Bombay High Court, contending that the action was arbitrary and unconstitutional.

While hearing his petition, the court took note of Khan's unconditional apology and his undertaking not to participate in protests in the future. It extended its interim order keeping the Leave India Notice in abeyance until December 7, while allowing him an opportunity to respond to the notice before the FRRO takes a decision. The case will be heard again on that date.