The Bombay High Court on Monday (November 2) directed actor Imran Khan to furnish an unconditional apology for participating protests demanding resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar in connection of Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise conducted in the country.

The court also directed the actor to file an undertaking stating that he will not participate in any such protests in future, while extending the operation of the order suspending the Leave India notice issued against by the Foreigners Registration Regional Office (FRRO) until Khan gets an opportunity to respond to the notice.

Khan had moved the high court challenging the 'Leave India Notice' (LIN) issued to him by the FRRO, Mumbai asking him to leave India by October 28. In the previous hearing, the FRRO had assured that no steps will be taken against him till today.

After hearing the matter for some time a division bench of Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna orally observed that it will ask the actor to give an "unconditional apology" considering that he was an OCI card holder, was not affected by SIR and had no business venturing into such protest. It said:

"In our order, we will say that you will give him some time to file his response... He will file his undertaking and unconditional apology etc. because (at) some point of time you will show magnanimity and say this man must live here... Considering the fact that he has been living in our country for all these years and has worked here got recognition from here then you must show a big heart.

Also, we may clarify that an OCI Card Holder cannot criticise or venture into all this by living here...this will not be tolerated....Go to USA and participate in protests there and you can even go and cast your vote but you protesting anything here won't be tolerated".

During the hearing the court sought to know the status of the FIR lodged against Khan.

The court also orally asked Khan to clarify the purpose for which he attended the protest, noting that as an OCI card holder Khan can have no concern with the protest pertaining to SIR.

"What for were you there? There's a complete difference between rights of citizens of OCI Card holders... You need to clarify were you there for protests or for some other work? You will have to categorically make a statement that you had no association with the protests etc. Because the agitation was with regards to SIR, with which you have no concern at all"

Giving an example, the court court orally remarked that if an Indian citizen participates in protests in any other country such as USA, that person would have been sent back to India on the next immediate flight.

"Suppose you have participated inadvertently etc then you need to apologise without such unconditional apology we will not accept your undertaking... Because you are not even remotely affected by SIR... You have no business there... You need to understand that you as an OCI Card holder aren't at par with Indian citizens..." it orally added.

The court orally asked Government Pleader Anjali Helekar representing the State if there was any complicity by the petitioner in the FIR. To this Helekar said that she will have to seek instructions.

Senior Advocate Venkatesh Dhond appearing for Khan argued that Khan had not yet been called for any probe, or for recording any statement etc.He further submitted that Khan has no association with the protestors or organisers etc.

Dhond said that except for two years in USA where he was born, he had lived his entire life in India.

To this court orally asked, "So far as your OCI card is concerned, it is stated in your plea that you are searching for job? Thus I am asking, you are a celebrity, you are a star then what occassion was it for you to go there? I understand if...your film is releasing and you go there for promotion etc. So this is your categorical statement that you are not associated with the protestors or organisers of the protests".

Dhond meanwhile said that Khan will also give an undertaking that he will not participate in protests. He also informed the court that Khan is 42-years-old.

Meanwhile Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Anil Singh appearing for Centre said that Khan in his plea had mentioned that he went to the protests out of curiosity however on social media he had "instigated people", urging that the court should not protect him.

"There are SC judgments saying even if someone has a lifelong Visa they can still be stopped from entering India... An OCI Card holder has very limited rights. I have an unfettered right against a foreigner... He has to go and he can't continue living in India for now...," the ASG said.

To this the Chief Justice orally said that Khan's entire pleadings were based on violation of natural justice principles in passing the Leave India order without granting an opportunity of hearing.

"Can such an order be passed, especially considering the fact that he hasn't violated any law of the land all these years?" the court asked.

ASG Singh while vehemently opposing the plea said that Khan had no legally enforceable rights since he is an OCI Card holder. He said that fundamental right available to a foreigner is only under Article 21 but that does not give him a "right to reside here".

Dhond however claimed that Khan had received OCI in 2006 and before that he had another facility of Person of Indian Origin.

Meanwhile the court said that while it agreed with the contention by ASG on rights of OCI Card holder, however it felt that an opportunity must be given to the petitioner to object to the leave India notice or respond to it.

"Suppose he had not been there and there was no material on any site then in that situation what have you done?," the court asked.

However Singh submitted that Courts had repeatedly upheld that Centre had unfettered powers.

The court thereafter said that the Leave India notice date of October 28 had already passed. It said that while it agreed that the Centre had sovereign power and an OCI Card holder cannot venture into all this but the ground reality was different.

It asked, "Suppose if Maharashtra Police comes later and says that there is no material against him, then what?" adding that Khan had lived in the country for "so many years".

To this ASG Singh said that then such a person has to be more responsible. The court meanwhile said that the country practices the principle of "Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam".

The court thereafter passed an order clarifying that an OCI Card Holder cannot be treated at par with Indian citizens but has considered the petitioner's undertaking and unconditional apology.

It thus ordered continuation of suspension of leave India notice till the FRRO decides the matter after giving Khan an opportunity to respond to the notice.

The matter is next listed on December 7.

(Compiled by Malavika Prasad)