Showing posts with label Zulfiquar Memon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Zulfiquar Memon. Show all posts
Made scapegoat, was curious about crowd-Imran Khan
10:20 AM
Swati Deshpande (THE TIMES OF INDIA; October 18, 2026)
Mumbai: Actor Imran Khan Pal (44) filed a petition in Bombay High Court Saturday challenging a “leave India notice” issued to him by the FRRO for participating in a protest here on October 10 in support of the CJP’s anti-CEC stir in Delhi. Khan, a US national having an OCI registration, has been asked to leave the country by October 28, reports Swati Deshpande.
The notice is “arbitrary, unreasoned and wholly misconceived’’ and against principles of natural justice as it was issued sans any hearing to him and flouts his fundamental rights to equality under Article 14 and to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, his plea said. He was given neither reasons nor any reasonable opportunity to be heard and the notice was issued directly, he says in his petition.
His petition says it is a “punitive executive action’’ where he is made a “scapegoat’’ and the notice appears to be for “extraneous’’ reasons to “stifle perceived dissent.’’ The plea will be mentioned likely on Monday.
Leave India notice arbitrary, abuse of power: Actor’s plea
He said he has been in India since he was two years old and says that he has “no association, affiliation or connection whatsoever with any organization or institution involved in organizing or participating in the protest against the incumbent Chief Election Commissioner.’’
Articles 14 and 21 are constitutional guarantees available to even foreigners in India, his petition underscored. He e-filed his petition on Saturday and on the same day FRRO sent him a fresh notice.
The FRRO has invoked the Immigration and Foreigners Act (IFA) 2025 to issue him the “leave India notice”. The notice is based on “purported contravention of uncited provisions of the IFA and the Rules and Orders’’ under it, the petition states. The petition says Khan has no criminal antecedents.
Seeking urgent intervention of the HC to stay the notice, the petition filed through MZM Legal advocates Zulfiquar Memon, Parvez Memon and Chirag Naik, says its potential enforcement would be a “mockery of the principles of natural justice and the Constitution of India’’.
The notice is completely silent on any instances of the contravention in question; any underlying order or data forming the basis for issuance of the order or even any security report, the petition said. “The notice is not a bona fide exercise of statutory authority, but a manifestly arbitrary, high-handed and grossly disproportionate abuse of power, vitiated by complete non-application of mind. It seeks to single out the Petitioner as a convenient scapegoat and make an example of him in furtherance of extraneous personal agendas with which he has no connection, whether to appease public opinion or to stifle perceived dissent,’’ the petition says.
The notice doesn’t disclose statutory contravention or the semblance of any due process, Khan’s petition adds.
FRRO Mumbai issues show-cause notice to Imran Khan to cancel OCI tag over presence at stir site
10:19 AM
Swati Deshpande (THE TIMES OF INDIA; October 18, 2026)
Mumbai: After issuing actor Imran Khan a leave India notice on October 14, Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO), Mumbai, on Saturday sent him a second notice, this time asking him to show-cause why his Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) status should not be cancelled.
Khan, a US national, was granted OCI cardholder status on December 15, 2006. To decide if OCI registration should be cancelled, Centre views as relevant the “nature and circumstances” of activities undertaken in India and their implications.
The notice cites his presence at the August Kranti Maidan protest in support of CJP’s anti-CEC stir in Delhi. The notice says no police permission was granted for the protest and a case was registered against him and other protesters for unlawful assembly.
FRRO has sought his reply in 15 days as the law provides for a hearing before any action is taken to revoke an OCI card under the provisions of the Citizenship Act, 1955.
FRRO acknowledges, though, that the FIR registration and detention by themselves are not conclusive proof of the allegations or an automatic ground for cancellation of his OCI registration, nor does participation, by itself, establish a ground for cancellation.
However, FRRO said, the nature, circumstances and implications of acts on the interest of the public, and the OCI’s conduct, are to be examined, where relevant, to see if registration should be cancelled under section 7D of the Citizenship Act.
The Citizenship Act Section 7D (e) empowers revocation of OCI in the interests of the sovereignty, integrity of India and security of India, friendly relations with any foreign country, or in the interests of the general public. Centre said it was of the “provisional opinion” that Khan’s registration as an OCI Cardholder may be liable to cancellation under this section, subject to his reply and explanations.
FRRO cited an SC ruling to say national security falls under a “broad range of public interests” when legal powers are directed towards the protection of the interests of the state and the public, based always on facts as well.
Khan’s advocate Zulfiquar Memon of MZM Legal said, “As his legal representatives, we are currently examining the contents of the new show-cause notice issued to Imran and we look forward to complying and cooperating with the FRRO in terms of replying to the notice. However, we will take this point up before the high court when the matter comes up for hearing so that we get clarity on the status of the earlier issued leave India notice in light of this new show-cause notice issued by the FRRO.”
Centre said his participation, detention and related circumstances warrant scrutiny on whether his continued OCI status is consistent with the interests of the general public, and has factored in the distinction between Indians and OCIs and the limited and regulated rights available to OCIs.
Imran Khan to move Bombay High Court against order to leave India; didn’t take part in Mumbai protests, claim his lawyers
10:47 AM
S Ahmed Ali (THE TIMES OF INDIA; October 16, 2026)
Mumbai: Actor Imran Khan will move Bombay High Court challenging a Mumbai Police order directing him to leave India by October 28 for allegedly violating the Foreigners Act and related rules, his advocate Parvez Memon said.
Khan is being represented by advocates Zulfiquar Memon, Parvez Memon and Chirag Naik from MZM Legal LLP.
Memon said they would challenge the order on Friday. "Rules do not prohibit OCI (Overseas Citizen of India) cardholders from participating in a protest", Memon added further.
Khan, an Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cardholder, was served the order after BJP leader Kirit Somaiya sought action against him over his participation in a protest in Mumbai on Saturday in support of the Cockroach Janata Party.
Somaiya visited Gamdevi police station on Monday and submitted an application seeking action against the actor. The police subsequently forwarded the application to the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) for further action.
“Imran Khan staying in India for the last couple of days is showing extremism, fanaticism... Indians cannot tolerate it. Khan is a foreign citizen and hence he cannot protest,” Somaiya said.
A senior official confirmed that the actor had been directed to leave the country. “Imran Khan is indeed a foreign national. The competent authority has found that he is a foreign national and has violated the Foreigners Act and the Foreigners Rules. He has therefore been served an order to leave India by October 28,” the official said on condition of anonymity.
Somaiya has also written to Mumbai Police seeking Khan’s detention and deportation, alleging that his participation in the demonstration violated the rules governing OCI cardholders and the conditions of his visa. In a social media post, Somaiya said he had also lodged a complaint with the FRRO’s Immigration Division at Mumbai airport.
OCI cardholders are foreign nationals who enjoy certain privileges in India, including a lifelong, multiple-entry visa, subject to applicable rules. They are also entitled to specified benefits relating to education, property ownership and certain professional activities.
-------------------------------------------
S Ahmed Ali (THE TIMES OF INDIA; October 16, 2026)
Mumbai: Lawyers of actor Imran Khan, who has been asked by FRRO to leave the country by Oct 28, contend that he did not participate in the protest at August Kranti Maidan last Saturday.
Speaking to the media moments before being detained at the protest site, the actor had said, "I am here as a citizen, as a person who lives in this city. I am here to see why freedom of movement is being restricted, why are people's voices being repressed."
The controversy erupted after BJP ex-MP Kirit Somaiya sought action against Khan, saying the actor had no rights to protest challenging govt policy as he was a foreigner.
The defence also intends to question the allegation that Khan participated in the protest in the manner claimed by the complainant. "Let police take out the CCTV footage of the area and everything will be clear," advocate Zulfiquar Memon said. Apart from Memon, Khan is being represented by Parvez Memon and Chirag Naik from MZM Legal LLP.
According to the actor's defence, he was passing through Nana Chowk when the road was barricaded and media representatives approached him. The legal team plans to seek CCTV footage to establish his movements and determine whether he was an active participant in the demonstration.
These are the defence's claims and will need to be tested against evidence. The police had registered a case against the protestors, including Khan, for illegal assembly since police had not granted them permission for the protest.
Minister of state for home Yogesh Kadam defended the FRRO's decision. "When you enter a country, a visa is issued and certain conditions are stated. You cannot violate those conditions, and if any violation occurs, the relevant Act applies and a notice is issued," he said. Tushar Gandhi, who had called for Saturday's protest, condemned the action.
It has taken me a great deal to open up now and speak about it-Shweta Pandit
8:53 AM
Tanvi Trivedi (BOMBAY TIMES; October 20, 2018)
A few days ago, singer Sona Mohapatra accused composer Anu Malik of sexual harassment and soon after that, singer Shweta Pandit also accused him of sexually harassing her when she was 15 years old.
In a long note shared on Twitter, Shweta wrote, “It was the year 2000 when I was launched as a lead singer with Mohabbatein and was trying to get other good songs to follow up with the success of that soundtrack and the welcome it gave me in the music industry. He was recording a song with Sunidhi Chauhan and Shaan for Awara Paagal Deewana, when my mother and I walked into the monitor room. He told me to wait in the cabin inside… It was just him and me there. He then asked me to sing a few lines for a voice test. I sang it well and he said he will give me a song with Sunidhi and Shaan, but first give me a kiss now.” (sic) Anu Malik has called her allegations ‘ridiculous’ and his lawyer, Zulfiquar Memon, has issued a statement: “The allegations made against my client are emphatically denied as completely false and baseless. My client respects the #MeToo movement, but to use this movement to start a character assassination mission is obnoxious.”
Shweta, who is the grand niece of Pandit Jasraj, was in Rome for a concert, when BT contacted her. She said, “This is the whole issue. These men in power constantly think that they can get away with anything. First, it was Alisha Chinai, then Sona Mohapatra and now me. How can these allegations be baseless? Are we all mad? We were asked to keep shut at that time, because they told us that how can you go against the people who give you work? Can you imagine how numb I went when he asked me to kiss him? I was so depressed that I didn’t want to work in the industry.” She adds, “I wanted to share this so that I can warn other girls who are working with him. Truth is like fire and it spreads. All these years, we have dealt with such situations and it’s usually the women who are told to calm down. In our country, when women are sexually harassed, why are they asked to shut up? People say ‘Hota hai, jaane do’. It has taken me a great deal to open up now and speak about it. The reason why I don’t have a single song with him in my entire career is now out in the public. He asked me to sing something without any music, as he wanted to hear my voice. I remember I sang the title song of Har Dil Jo Pyar Karega as a voice test for him. I sang it well, so he said, ‘I will give you this song with Sunidhi and Shaan, but first give me a kiss now.” Obviously, I had to walk out. In fact, before this happened, I was a big fan of his music. I wanted to sing for him. These powerful men don’t understand that such harassment destroys lives. All these years, I had to struggle and deal with it. At least, the #MeToo movement is empowering women to talk about it. We are entitled to a work environment where such things don’t happen.”
Reacting to lyricist Sameer’s tweet (posted on Thursday) in which he supported Anu Malik, she said, “It is all lies. It’s a boys club supporting each other.”
--------------------------
Lyricist Sameer Anjaan defends Anu Malik, recalling Shweta Pandit’s visit to his studio over a decade ago
Soumya Vajpayee (BOMBAY TIMES; October 20, 2018)
A day after Shweta Pandit accused Anu Malik of sexual harassment, lyricist Sameer Anjaan took to Twitter to support him. When BT reached out to Sameer, he said that he was present at the recording studio when Shweta and her mother visited Anu Malik.
Recalling the incident, Sameer said, “I knew Shweta’s entire family and she would often request me to arrange a meeting with Anu ji. The day she came to his studio with her mother, I was there as we were working on a song. When Anu ji asked her to sing, she requested if they could go to another room. But Anu ji said, it’s better if everyone in the studio listens, too. After listening to her sing, he said, ‘Beta, I like your voice, but we have singers at the moment. If there’s an opportunity in the future, I will call you’.”
Sameer added, “I’m amazed with the allegations that she has levelled on Anu ji after 15 years! Just imagine, she was a 15-year-old girl back then, who came to the studio with her mom. How would anyone have the audacity to take her to another room in front of her mother? And even if we assume that he did, being a teenager, the first thing anyone would do is tell her mother immediately. What made her keep the truth under wraps for 15 years? She belongs to a musical family, so how could she accuse a senior musician like him? I have known Anu ji for many years. He respects the people he works with. If she is so sure, instead of speaking to the media without any evidence, she should go to the court.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)