What is a Leave India Notice? Who can issue it, and who can be asked to leave India?

The Bombay High Court's proceedings in actor Imran Khan's case have brought attention to the government's powers to ask foreign nationals, including Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cardholders, to leave India. Khan, a US citizen and OCI cardholder, was issued a 'Leave India Notice' by Mumbai's Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) on October 14, directing him to leave the country by October 28. The notice followed his brief detention near Mumbai's August Kranti Maidan during a protest against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

Khan has challenged the notice before the Bombay High Court, saying he did not participate in the gathering and had no association with its organisers. The court has kept the notice in abeyance until December 7, while the matter remains pending. The case has brought the legal framework governing Leave India Notices and the status of OCI cardholders into focus. What does the law provide, who can issue such a notice, and what have courts said about the government's power to ask a foreign national to leave? What is a Leave India Notice? A Leave India Notice (LIN) is a direction issued by an immigration authority asking a foreign national to leave India within a specified period.

The expression is used in immigration practice, but it is not separately defined in the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025. The Act provides for orders restricting a foreigner's entry, departure, or continued presence in India, as well as the government's power to direct their removal. A notice asking a person to leave by a specified date is distinct from the actual enforcement of removal. If the person does not comply with the direction, the authorities may take steps under the law to enforce it. What does the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025 say? The Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, came into force on September 1, 2025, replacing four earlier laws: the Foreigners Act, 1946; the Passport (Entry into India)

Act, 1920; the Registration of Foreigners Act, 1939; and the Immigration (Carriers' Liability) Act, 2000. Section 2(f) defines a foreigner as a person who is not an Indian citizen. Section 3 requires a foreign national entering or staying in India to possess a valid passport or other travel document and a valid visa, unless exempted under the law. The government's power to regulate the presence of foreigners is set out in Section 7. It authorises the Central Government to issue orders, directions or instructions restricting the entry, departure or continued presence of foreigners in India. The power may be exercised in relation to all foreigners, a particular category or an individual.

Under Section 7(2)(c), an order may direct a foreigner not to remain in India or in a specified area. Section 7(2)(f) allows the government to impose conditions on a foreigner's stay, including restrictions on movement, association with specified persons and participation in activities of a specified description. Section 7(4) allows an authority designated for this purpose to issue an individual order under Section 7(2)(f). Section 29 deals specifically with removal. It empowers the Central Government to direct the removal of a foreigner for contravening the Act, any rule or order made under it, or on the basis of an adverse security report.

Government officers are authorised to take the necessary steps to enforce such a direction. The Act also provides for penalties. Under Section 23, a foreigner who overstays, stays without valid travel documents or violates visa conditions can face imprisonment of up to three years, a fine of up to Rs 3 lakh, or both. Section 26 empowers a police officer of the rank of Head Constable or above to arrest without a warrant for specified violations of Section 3 or an order made under it. Who can issue a Leave India Notice? Section 7 vests the power to issue orders restricting a foreigner's stay in the Central Government.

However, Section 28 allows the Centre to delegate its powers and functions to subordinate officers and authorities, State governments and officers authorised by them. The Ministry of Home Affairs issued a delegation notification on September 1, 2025, under the new law. Designated immigration authorities, including FRROs, can exercise powers delegated to them within the scope of the notification. The Bureau of Immigration and its network of FRROs and Foreigners Registration Officers handle immigration-related functions. The authority of an FRRO to issue a particular notice would depend on the powers delegated to it and the relevant provisions invoked in that case.

Who can be asked to leave India? The provisions of the Act apply to foreign nationals who are not Indian citizens. This includes people holding valid visas and OCI cards. A foreign national may face immigration action for overstaying, violating visa conditions, entering or remaining in a protected or restricted area without the required permission, or contravening an order issued under the Act. The government can also restrict a foreigner's continued presence on the grounds specified in the law, including an adverse security report. A valid visa permits a foreigner to stay in India subject to its conditions.

It does not confer an unconditional right to remain in the country, and the government retains powers under the Act to regulate a foreigner's stay. Can OCI cardholders also be asked to leave India? An OCI cardholder is not an Indian citizen and falls within the definition of a foreigner under Section 2(f) of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025. OCI status is not dual citizenship. It provides eligible foreign nationals of Indian origin with certain privileges, including a lifelong, multiple-entry visa to visit India. However, OCI cardholders do not enjoy all the rights available to Indian citizens.

Section 7B of the Citizenship Act, 1955, provides for the rights and privileges that may be extended to OCI cardholders. These do not include certain political and constitutional rights, such as the right to vote or contest elections. A Ministry of Home Affairs notification dated March 4, 2021, requires OCI cardholders to obtain special permission for specified activities, including research, missionary or Tabligh work, mountaineering, journalism and visits to protected, restricted or prohibited areas. The notification does not expressly list participation in protests among these activities. It provides that in areas not specifically covered, OCI cardholders have the same rights as foreign nationals.

The Constitution also distinguishes between rights available to citizens and those available to all persons. Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b), which guarantee freedom of speech and expression and the right to assemble peacefully, are available to Indian citizens. Articles 14 and 21, which concern equality before the law and protection of life and personal liberty, apply to non-citizens as well. What have courts said about Leave India Notices? Courts have examined the government's powers to regulate the stay of foreign nationals, including cases involving valid visas and notices directing foreigners to leave India.

In Mohd Javed and Another v. Union of India (May 2019), the Delhi High Court considered a Leave India Notice issued to Nausheen Naz, a Pakistani national married to an Indian citizen. She had been living in India on a long-term visa that was valid until June 2020 when the notice directed her to leave within 15 days. The government relied on intelligence inputs to justify the notice. However, a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court found that the material placed before it did not establish conduct warranting such action. It also examined the absence of any procedure before the notice was issued, including an opportunity for Naz to respond to the grounds against her.

The court held that the notice did not meet the requirements of law and set it aside. The judgment discussed the distinction between the government's power over a foreigner's stay and the procedural protections available to a person holding a valid visa. In Kamil Siedczynski v Union of India (March 2020), the Calcutta High Court considered a Leave India Notice issued to a Polish student at Jadavpur University. The notice was issued under the Foreigners Act, 1946, after he allegedly participated in protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act. The court noted that the student held a valid visa and examined whether his alleged participation in a political rally was sufficient to justify his expulsion.

It held that Article 21's protection of life and personal liberty extends to foreigners in India and that the government's action must be supported by valid reasons and follow due process. The court set aside the notice, finding that the grounds placed before it did not justify the student's expulsion. The Supreme Court had also considered procedural safeguards in Hasan Ali Raihany v Union of India (2006), a case involving the proposed deportation of a foreign national whose residential permit had been extended. The court directed the authorities to communicate the reasons for the proposed deportation and give him an opportunity to make a representation.

It said the representation should be considered before an appropriate order was passed, while recognising that compelling national security considerations could warrant a different approach. The Delhi High Court referred to this ruling in Mohd Javed. A separate question concerning OCI cardholders arose in John Robert Roughton III v Union of India, decided by the Delhi High Court in March 2025. The case concerned a US citizen and OCI cardholder who was denied entry into India on his return from abroad and sent back without being given reasons. The court examined the safeguards under Section 7D of the Citizenship Act, which governs cancellation of OCI registration and provides for a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

The judgment considered whether these safeguards were relevant to the action taken against the petitioner under the foreigners law. The legal position on whether Section 7D's hearing safeguards automatically apply to proceedings under the foreigners law has also been considered in Khalid Jahangir Qazi v. Union of India. In an interim order in August 2026, a Delhi High Court Division Bench expressed a prima facie view that the safeguards under Section 7D could not automatically be imported into proceedings under the Foreigners Act. The matter involved cross-appeals and the court's observation was an interim view.

These judgments arose under different statutory provisions and on their respective facts. The 2025 Act has since replaced the Foreigners Act, 1946, and the application of its provisions has to be considered in the context of the new statutory framework. How is cancellation of OCI status different from a Leave India Notice? A direction to leave India and cancellation of OCI registration are separate legal processes. Section 7D of the Citizenship Act, 1955, empowers the Central Government to cancel OCI registration on specified grounds. These include obtaining registration through fraud or false representation, showing disaffection towards the Constitution, certain specified violations of law, and circumstances involving India's sovereignty, security, friendly relations with foreign countries or the interests of the general public.

The provision requires that an OCI cardholder be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard before their registration is cancelled. Therefore, a Leave India Notice does not, by itself, amount to cancellation of an OCI card. Any proposed cancellation has to be dealt with separately under the Citizenship Act. In Imran Khan's case, the FRRO issued a separate show-cause notice on October 17, asking why his OCI registration should not be cancelled under Section 7D. This is distinct from the Leave India Notice issued on October 14 under the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025.