What started as a purchase of a discounted supercar soon turned into a legal battle involving allegations of forgery, tax loss and FIRs, before the Karnataka High Court stepped in and questioned the conduct of an RTO officer while impounding the vehicle.According to court proceedings reported by the Economic Times, Rama, a resident of Bengaluru, bought a demo supercar on September 1, 2025. The vehicle was originally produced in 2021 and was briefly registered in 2022 before being returned by its first owner. The dealer allegedly informed Rama about the vehicle’s demo status before the sale.However, trouble started months later on 7 February 2026, when a senior RTO officer from Bengaluru, along with other officials, allegedly entered Ram’s premises while he was away and impounded the vehicle. The car was later taken to Yelahanka New Town Police Station on Allasandra Main Road.
When Rama returned home, he found that zero FIR and criminal case had been registered against him. The charges included fraud, forgery and forgery of vehicle registration documents. The case was registered under Sections 318(4) and 336(3) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Naya Sanhita, which corresponded to the provisions of cheating and forgery under the erstwhile IPC.During the hearing, the Karnataka State Public Prosecutor argued that the fake receipts and manipulation of 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 newly registered.Rama’s lawyer, Venkatesh S Arbati, argued that after the vehicle was taken, his client was not told where it was taken and was forced to run between different police jurisdictions. Later he approached the court for release of the vehicle under the provisions of BNSS.While the High Court allowed an inquiry into the alleged manipulation of RTO records, it strongly objected to the manner in which the vehicle was impounded. The Karnataka High Court later quashed the FIR and criticized the RTO officer’s actions.Justice M Nagaprasana orally remarked that officials have “no mandate” to enter someone’s home and seize a vehicle without proper legal authority. The court further observed that even the State Public Prosecutor could not justify the force used for such seizure and warned that such acts should not be repeated.
