HC stays probe in viral Lamborghini case after owner pays fine, fixes noisy silencer

Karnataka High Court halts further investigation against Bengaluru resident booked for rash driving after viral videos, notes compliance with penalties and vehicle correction

The Karnataka High Court has stayed further proceedings against a Bengaluru resident who was booked for rash and reckless driving after videos of his loud Lamborghini went viral on social media. The interim relief was granted by Justice M. Nagaprasanna while hearing a petition filed by B.R. Chiranth, a resident of CV Raman Nagar in east Bengaluru.

The case originated after videos surfaced online showing a Maharashtra-registered Lamborghini being driven in a reckless manner, accompanied by excessive noise. The incidents reportedly occurred on December 14 and December 19, 2025. Following the circulation of the videos, the Kengeri traffic police registered a suo motu case against the driver.

Also Read:Viral video of speeding green Lamborghini on Mysuru Road triggers police action in Bengaluru

During the hearing, the High Court took note of the fact that Chiranth had already paid the fine imposed for the violations under the Indian Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The court was also informed that the retrofitted silencer, which caused the excessive noise, had been replaced in compliance with the law.

Despite the fine being collected earlier, the police had proceeded to register a criminal case on the grounds that the modified silencer had not been changed. Challenging this action, Chiranth approached the High Court, stating that he had rectified the issue and complied with all legal requirements.

Considering these submissions, the court decided to stay further investigation in the matter until the next hearing scheduled for February 6. Justice Nagaprasanna observed that if the proceedings are found to be in favour of the petitioner, appropriate orders would be passed at the stage of closure.

The interim order brings temporary relief to the petitioner while the court examines whether further prosecution is warranted, given the compliance already made by the vehicle owner.