Bombay High Court puts actor Imran Khan's 'Leave India' notice on hold until November 2

The Bombay High Court on October 27 granted interim relief to actor Imran Khan, keeping in abeyance until November 2 a notice from the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) in Mumbai that directed him to leave India by October 28 (Mathrubhumi, The Logical Indian). The government assured the court that no coercive action would be taken against him until the next hearing (The Sentinel, O Heraldo). The notice followed his alleged participation in a protest against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar (The Hindu, The Quint).

What every report agrees on

Reports agree that Khan, 43, is a US citizen holding an Overseas Citizen of India card (O Heraldo, The Logical Indian). Outlook and The Free Press Journal report he was briefly detained by police in Mumbai on October 10 at the protest (Outlook, The Free Press Journal). The New Indian Express dates the notice to October 14 (The New Indian Express), while Scroll.in says the FRRO issued the direction on October 15 (Scroll.in). A division bench of Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna first deferred the hearing on October 26 to the following day (The Hindu, The Shillong Times, The Times of India), and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta was to appear for the government (LiveLaw). On October 27 the bench adjourned the case to November 2 after the Centre sought more time to respond (Pragativadi, Filmfare).

How the left-leaning press told it

Deccan Herald, The New Indian Express, The Hindu, The Express Tribune, Hindustan Times, Outlook, Scroll.in and The Quint: Court hearing and interim relief

Outlets rated centre-left, such as The Hindu, Scroll.in, Outlook and The Quint, mostly reported the hearings and the interim relief (The Hindu, Scroll.in, Outlook, The Quint). Hindustan Times relayed Khan's description of the notice as arbitrary, illegal, perverse and drastic (Hindustan Times), and The New Indian Express reported his argument that the FRRO gave him no chance to respond (The New Indian Express). Deccan Herald noted he sought quashing of the notice and an interim stay (Deccan Herald).

How the right-leaning press told it

ABP Live, The Times of India, India Today and The Economic Times: Court hearing and interim relief

Outlets rated centre-right also centred on the court schedule, with The Times of India reporting the adjournment and ABP Live previewing possible interim relief (The Times of India, ABP Live). India Today relayed Khan's denial of any link to the protest organisers and his account that he went to August Kranti Maidan out of curiosity (India Today). The Economic Times added a reference to Indian law on foreign nationals who take part in political protests (The Economic Times).

The coverage of this story does not divide along left and right lines.

What the record shows

The record so far consists of Khan's petition and the court's interim order. Khan argues the notice lacks legal specificity and was issued without a fair hearing (Asianet Newsable), and his plea denies association with those who organised the protest (India Today). The court kept the notice in abeyance on the government's assurance of no coercive action until November 2 (Yes Punjab, The Logical Indian). DNA India reports Khan has also contested a separate notice proposing cancellation of his OCI card and asked authorities to share the evidence behind it (DNA India). The Economic Times notes that under Indian law foreign nationals joining political protests may face consequences (The Economic Times). The government's substantive response has not been presented, and no report describes a ruling on whether the notice is lawful (Pragativadi, Filmfare).

Drafted by the Alethman engine from 25 independent reports, and checked by an editor before publication. An outlet's side comes from published media-bias ratings (Media Bias/Fact Check, AllSides) or documented ownership, named under the coverage bar; Alethman does not rate outlets itself.