High court pulls up MVI over midnight seizure of Lamborghini

Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has strongly reprimanded a senior Motor Vehicles Inspector (MVI) for allegedly entering a car owner’s residence past midnight and towing away a luxury Lamborghini on charges of fraudulent registration without prior notice.

The single-judge bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna was hearing a criminal petition filed by J. Ramakrishnaiah, owner of the vehicle and head of ‘Hi Car Care’. The petitioner challenged the manner in which his car was seized from his home garage late at night.

Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Venkatesh Arabatti submitted that on the night of the 7th, senior MVI N. Ranjith entered the petitioner’s residence around 11.30 pm and had the vehicle towed away. Subsequently, a case alleging cheating and fraud was registered at Kodigehalli police station.

Objecting to the petition, State Public Prosecutor B.S. Belliyappa argued that the vehicle had originally been registered in 2022 and that old registration data had been replaced with new information at the RTO. He contended that the government exchequer had suffered losses and that the seizure followed an inquiry by the Joint Transport Commissioner. Once a case of tax evasion was registered, the inspector had the authority to seize the vehicle, he maintained.

The bench, however, questioned the legal basis for such action. “Show me the statutory provision that authorises this,” the court asked, expressing dissatisfaction when the prosecution sought additional time to respond.

In sharp remarks, Justice Nagaprasanna observed that a senior officer entering a citizen’s home at night and towing away a high-value car raised serious concerns. “If someone entered your home like this, would you remain silent?” the judge asked, questioning why no prior notice had been issued.

The court warned that even minor damage to the car during towing would invite personal liability for the officer. It stayed the FIR registered at Kodigehalli police station and directed the petitioner to approach the magistrate court for immediate interim custody of the vehicle. The matter has been posted for further hearing on the 18th.

According to the prosecution, the car was initially purchased in 2022 by Harsha Infra Cons Private Limited and later sold to the petitioner after three years of use. Authorities allege forged documents were submitted during registration, leading to a criminal case under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner has denied the charges, stating that the car was bought through a dealer and that ₹1 crore GST and ₹60 lakh road tax were duly paid before registration by the Bengaluru East RTO.