The Karnataka High Court quashed proceedings over alleged Lamborghini tax evasion, with Justice M Nagaprasanna rebuking an inspector for illegal seizure, ordering inquiry, stressing officials must act within law.
KARNATAKA: The Karnataka High Court sharply rebuked a motor vehicle inspector for his handling of a case alleging that the owner of a Lamborghini had forged documents to evade tax. Justice M Nagaprasanna quashed the criminal proceedings initiated on the inspector’s complaint and granted authorities liberty to take any further action as permitted by law.
The court also criticised how the officer seized the vehicle from the owner’s garage and ordered the car to be released within a week. Justice Nagaprasanna said he is directing a departmental inquiry into the inspector’s conduct for acting flagrantly outside the law.
The judge remarked,
“You (motor vehicle inspector) could not have done it sir. You had no mandate to enter somebody’s house and take away the vehicle, that’s all. You may be best officer, but the best officer also has to act within the corners of the law. There is no answer from the SPP on who gave you that power. Such things should not be repeated. Acting contrary to law cannot be countenanced,”
Counsel for the motor vehicle department asked the court to be lenient and merely reprimand the official, assuring that the conduct would not recur. They also suggested that the car owner was not entirely blameless.
Noting that an officer’s duty cannot be used as a pretext to flout legal limits, the judge replied,
“That is a different matter, I am not dubbing him as a paragon of virtue,”
The bench added that government officials cannot adopt a “how’s the josh” approach to justify unlawful acts.
The judge observed,
“I’m not concerned about vehicle, whether it’s a Maruti car or whatever it is. You have no right to enter into somebody’s house, take away the vehicle, you yourself being the complainant!”
Counsel informed the court that the inspector had seized the vehicle and then filed the complaint, a sequence the bench found unacceptable.
Justice Nagaprasanna remarked,
“Totally contrary to law – you seize the vehicle, then go register a complaint – what is all this? You treat the office as a personal fiefdom,”
When counsel again sought leniency for the inspector, the judge responded, “We’ll see. Anyway, release the vehicle.”
The petition was filed by Hi Care, represented by proprietor J. Ramakrishnaiah, which owns the Lamborghini. The petitioner sought quashing of the fraud and forgery allegations, calling them baseless.
Earlier, the petitioner’s counsel told the court the Lamborghini Huracán Evo had been purchased in 2025 from Hoysala Automotives for Rs 3 crore, with Rs 1 crore paid as GST and Rs 60 lakh as road tax. The counsel also criticised the manner and timing of the seizure, saying the owner was left to run from pillar to post to secure the car’s release.
Following preliminary submissions, the court stayed the criminal case on February 12 and allowed the owner to approach the trial court for the vehicle’s release.
The High Court censured the inspector for entering the owner’s private garage at night and seizing the car when no one was present. In a recent hearing the judge questioned the officer’s haste and “heroism,” warning he would have to “face the music” for his actions. The bench also queried why the Road Transport Officer who registered the vehicle had not been implicated if registration fraud was at issue.
Judgment copy is awaited.
FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE