Mumbai: Bombay HC on Monday said it will on Oct 26 hear actor and US national Imran Khan’s petition against a notice to leave India following an anti-CEC stir, two days before the deadline set by the Foreigners Regional Registration Officer (FRRO), Mumbai.The Chief Justice-led bench asked the actor to also make the state a party.Senior counsel Venkatesh Dhond for Khan (43) mentioned the matter for urgent hearing. He said the actor has been living in India since the age of 2 and has been “asked to leave without notice, without any hearing, without reasons”. He said the petition states that Khan has no criminal antecedents.Dhond sought a hearing this week. Additional solicitor general Anil Singh for the Centre and FRRO said it could be heard on Oct 26. Dhond said since the actor has been asked to leave by Oct 28, it would be cutting it too close. Singh, however, said, “We will come prepared to argue the matter.”Khan was issued the notice by FRRO on Oct 14 following his brief detention from the site of a protest held in the city on Oct 10 against chief election commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.The HC bench asked if all parties had been served a copy of the petition. Dhond said it had been. Singh said he had received a copy of the petition “10 minutes ago”.The actor had filed the petition on Saturday challenging the notice as “arbitrary, unreasoned and wholly misconceived’’ and against principles of natural justice. The plea said the FRRO notice is based on “purported contravention of uncited provisions of Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, and rules and orders” under it.The petition said merely reproducing the words of a statutory provision mechanically is not sufficient in law and cannot be countenanced. It said the actor has been given the expulsion order solely because an FIR has been registered, which is at the stage of investigation. It said the offences alleged in the FIR are all bailable and none carries punishment exceeding two years in jail.It said no chargesheet has been filed yet, no court has taken cognisance, and no charge has been framed. “Even if a chargesheet were to be filed, the court may decline to take cognisance. If it takes cognisance, the petitioner may be discharged. If charges are framed, he may be acquitted. To expel the petitioner at the very threshold of that process is to visit the ultimate consequence upon a mere allegation and to condemn him, in effect, on the mere recording by police of an intimation of the commission of an offence,” it said.
