A person who drives another’s car without permission can face theft charges if the owner asserts that permission to use the vehicle was not given. This perspective was shared with socialbites.ca by Sergei Radko, a lawyer affiliated with the Freedom of Choice movement. He emphasized that there should be a solid, significant basis before authorities open an inquiry into someone who drives a car that does not belong to them.
According to Article 166 of the Penal Code, illegally possessing a vehicle without a legitimate purpose for theft can be punished. Radko explained to socialbites.ca that not granting permission to drive the car means the act constitutes a crime, even if the vehicle is not taken with the intent to steal. The key element is whether the car owner actually gave consent for the driver to operate the vehicle.
In situations where a stranger is behind the wheel out of urgent necessity, such cases must be proven. The lawyer noted that investigators must establish all the facts surrounding such incidents during pre-investigation checks or during formal investigations. The police are expected to gather the car owner’s account and interview all parties involved in the incident to determine the sequence of events and the specific circumstances that led to the driving of the vehicle.
Radko offered examples to illustrate how extreme necessity might be weighed. He pointed to scenarios such as saving a life or transporting a seriously ill or injured person to a hospital, or moving a woman who has just given birth to a maternity facility. He also cautioned that even in such life‑and‑death cases, questions may arise about why no ambulance was summoned and whether alternative options were considered.
The statutory framework under Article 166 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation sets penalties for theft that range from a fine of up to 200,000 rubles to as much as five years of imprisonment. More severe outcomes are possible when aggravating factors are present, such as premeditated intent, the use of force, or harm of a particularly serious nature, which can bring the maximum sentence to twelve years behind bars.
There have also been past reports highlighting incidents where an eyewitness in St. Petersburg observed a Volvo being parked by a driver who was only ten years old, an event that was subsequently reported to authorities. These cases underscore the complexities of determining intent, permission, and necessity in real-world driving scenarios. In every instance, prosecutors and investigators must carefully assess the facts, apply the law as written, and consider the broader implications for vehicle ownership, personal safety, and public order.
In sum, the law distinguishes between unauthorized driving and actions taken under extreme necessity. The offense hinges on control over consent to operate the vehicle, the presence or absence of dangerous circumstances, and the overall context in which the driver took the wheel. The legal process relies on careful evidence gathering, formal statements from involved parties, and a balanced evaluation of whether the conduct crossed the line into theft or remained within the bounds of permissible use in a true emergency. These considerations guide how cases are investigated, charged, and adjudicated, ensuring that the rights of vehicle owners and the safety of the public are both protected. (attribution: Sergei Radko, Freedom of Choice movement)