FRRO Issues Notice to Actor, an OCI Cardholder

Actor Imran Khan, a US citizen and Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cardholder, has been directed by the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) to leave India by October 28, days after participating in a protest in Mumbai demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

Khan was detained along with other demonstrators at August Kranti Maidan on October 10. Subsequently, BJP leader Kirit Somaiya complained to the police that Khan, as a foreign national, had violated the law by participating in the protest. The complaint was forwarded to the FRRO, which issued the notice citing an alleged violation of immigration law.

The OCI scheme, introduced in 2005, grants eligible foreign nationals of Indian origin certain privileges, including a lifelong multiple-entry visa and exemption from registration with the FRRO. However, OCI cardholders remain foreign citizens and do not enjoy political rights available to Indian citizens, including the right to vote or contest elections.

Immigration Law Gives Government Powers Over Foreign Nationals

The Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, which came into force in September 2025, replaced the Foreigners Act, 1946, and grants the government broad powers to regulate the presence and activities of foreign nationals in India.

The notice issued to Khan invokes Section 7(2)(c), read with Section 29 of the Act. Section 7 allows the government to direct a foreign national not to remain in India or a specified area, while Section 29 provides for removal in cases involving violations of the Act, its rules or orders, or an adverse security report.

However, the legislation does not explicitly prohibit foreign nationals from attending political rallies or demonstrations. A 2021 government notification specifying activities requiring special permission for OCI cardholders also does not expressly include participation in political protests.

In 2020, the Calcutta High Court quashed a similar notice issued to Polish student Kamil Siedczynski for participating in an anti-CAA rally, observing that participation in a political demonstration alone was insufficient to justify the action under the law then in force.