What started as a discounted supercar purchase soon turned into a legal battle involving allegations of forgery, tax loss and an FIR, before the Karnataka High Court intervened and questioned the conduct of an RTO official during the seizure of the vehicle.According to court proceedings reported by Economic Times, Bengaluru resident Ram had purchased a demo supercar on September 1, 2025. The vehicle was originally manufactured in 2021 and briefly registered in 2022 before being returned by its first owner. The dealer had reportedly informed Ram about the demo status of the vehicle before the sale.However, trouble started months later on February 7, 2026, when a senior Bengaluru RTO official, along with other officials, allegedly barged into Ram’s premises while he was away and seized the vehicle. The car was later taken to Yelahanka New Town Police Station on Allasandra Main Road.
When Ram returned home he came to know that zero FIR and criminal case had been registered against him. The charges include fraud, forgery and falsification of documents related to vehicle registration. The case was registered under Section 3(5) read with Sections 318(4) and 336(3) of the Indian Judicial Code, read with cheating and forgery provisions under the earlier IPC.During the hearing, the Karnataka State Public Prosecutor argued that the forged invoices and manipulated registration records had caused financial loss to the state exchequer. It was also alleged that the car remained unregistered for almost four years and the RTO database records were altered to show the vehicle as newly manufactured and freshly registered.Rama’s lawyer, Venkatesh S. Arbatti argued that after the vehicle was removed, his client was not told where it had been taken and he was forced to run between different police jurisdictions demanding answers. He later moved the court seeking release of the vehicle under the provisions of BNSS.While the High Court allowed investigation into the alleged manipulation of RTO records, it took strong objection to the manner in which the vehicle was seized. The Karnataka High Court later quashed the FIR and criticized the actions of the RTO officer.Justice M. Nagaprasanna orally remarked that the officers had “no right” to enter someone’s home and take away a vehicle without proper legal authority. The court further said that even the state public prosecutor could not justify the power used for such seizures and warned that such actions should not be repeated.
(TagstoTranslate)Karnataka High Court(T)Demo supercar deal(T)RTO officer(T)Forgery allegations(T)FIR fight(T)Bengaluru supercar purchase(T)Vehicle seizure(T)Legal battle(T)Ram vehicle case
