By Arun Srivastava
A strong and effective voice of protest is a fundamental cornerstone of a healthy democracy. It serves as a vital mechanism for citizen engagement, accountability, and social progress. But this basic democratic dictum is facing the worst nature of existential crisis under Narendra Modi Raj, even far worse than what India had witnessed in seventies under Indira Gandhi. The right to protest in India under Modi faces intense scrutiny and a severe crisis amid widespread mass detentions and security lockdowns.
On October 15, the Mumbai Police issued a “Leave India Notice” (externment) to Bollywood actor Imran Khan. He has been formally ordered to exit the country by October 28, following an investigation into his participation in a political demonstration. This draconian order from Mumbai police has shaken the democratic conscience of the country, as everybody is busy trying to find out when the right to political protests was banned in India, which is the right to peaceful assembly is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(b) of the Constitution.
Though the government frequently uses specific legal provisions to enforce localized or temporary bans on protests, it is specifically not mentioned in any statute book that even a peaceful political protester would be externed. This simply implies that police, across country, under the control of Amit Shah has developed utter contempt for Constitution, the Supreme Court, and treats itself as the super authority. Police has come to nurse the perception that no one touch them, not even CJI of Supreme Court, with Amit Shah as their boss.
Right to Protest: Guaranteed under Article 19(1)(b) of the Indian Constitution, citizens have the right to assemble peaceably and without arms. This right does not require state approval or a license, though the state may enforce reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order. Even if, it is supposed, that protest is not absolute and disrupts daily life, the police cannot extern any protester.
True enough the Supreme Court should have taken suo moto cognisance of this violation of basic rights, but unfortunately it has preferred to look at the development as a passive spectator and virtually allowing the police to act arbitrarily and dictate peoples’ life much against the spirit and tenets of the Constitution. After Modi came to power in 2014, India has banned public protests on the plea of ending social unrest.
Following the directions of the Mumbai police people are keen to know the reasons for Imran Khan’s externment. The reason provided is too fragile. On October 10, 2026, the actor participated in a protest organized by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) at Mumbai’s August Kranti Maidan. The demonstrators were demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner, Gyanesh Kumar. Imran Khan, (the nephew of superstar Aamir Khan), along with his partner Lekha Washington and others, was detained by the police. What helped Mumbai police to accomplish its design was Imran is an American national. Later it served him an official notice ordering him to leave India by October 28, for violating the Immigration and Foreigners Act by participating in local political protests.
The relationship between Indian Americans, Narendra Modi, and Donald Trump highlights a notable duality in diaspora politics. Modi is free to rush to US and appeal to the Indian diaspora to vote for Donald Trump, but the Indian Americans cannot question and protest against his policies. It cannot be denied that for his holding an American passport and an Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) card, he has forfeited the right to support a protest. He has to face the police action following a complaint by BJP leader Kirit Somaiya. This desperate action of police points to it becoming vulnerable to BJP cadres’ actions.
The BJP and RSS cadres have been specifically targeting the Muslims. In this case Imran Khan too is Muslim, a prime catch for Kirit Somaya who of late has been put on sidelines of party activities. BJP leader Kirit Somaiya has demanded action against Khan, questioning the right of a foreign national with OCI status to participate in a political agitation against the Indian government. Mumbai police is yet to specifically mention and clarify whether Imran was a protester, or participant, or onlooker but unfortunately the judgement has been pronounced.
It is a notable paradox that highlights how differently public figures are treated based on the nature of their visibility. We Indians believe and practice duplicity. When an Indian American or a member of Indian diaspora achieves success in corporate leadership, politics, science, or academia, he is widely praised and eulogized as a testament to the “model minority” success story, reflecting well on both the diaspora and the community’s work ethic. Indians are not tired of identifying him as his own brother. However, when an individual engages in controversial political activism or protests, he faces backlash, public scrutiny, or institutional persecution. This duality often stems from societal expectations. “Achievers” align with established, comfortable narratives of success, while “protestors” challenge status-quo political structures, leading to a much more polarized reception.
Decision to extern Imran is a strategic move of Modi government to the OCI or diaspora members not to oppose his government and extend support to Congress and opposition. It is significant that this action against Imran has come in the wake of Indian American diaspora groups and organizations have been organising coordinated protests and meetings across several cities in the USA to express opposition to the Modi government for his misgovernance and dismantling of democracy. The recent surge in political opposition within the diaspora focuses primarily on a massive domestic voter registration and list revision process in India, which critics claim has led to selective disenfranchisement.
Multi-city rallies have been organized by Hindu, Dalit, and broader South Asian progressive organizations. Gatherings have taken place in states including Massachusetts, New Jersey, Georgia, Texas, New York, and California. Many of these U.S. diaspora meetings were held in solidarity with the “Cockroach Janta Party” (CJP).
Narendra Modi has already been using anti-terror laws like the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and preventive detentions against journalists, student leaders, and activists as a means to silence political opposition. Autonomy of vital institutions—including the judiciary, the Election Commission, and the parliament—has been compromised to favour BJP. (IPA Service)
