The Honda CR-V, presented as material evidence in a criminal case, was described by Maxim Silkov of the Otocinal Specialist Center in reports carried by Gazeta.ru.
In 2022 Nina bought the vehicle from a dealer and registered it with the traffic police. In 2024 a lawsuit progressed to a hearing in which she was named as a third party, and the executive officers sought to have the car confiscated for the state. The case was driven by those officers who were tasked with enforcing the court decision.
Earlier, in 2019, the former owner of the Honda CR-V was involved in a road incident that drew police attention on a route in Kurgan. The car was entered into the case file as material evidence for that criminal matter.
Subsequently, the vehicle was handed back to the owner for safekeeping, but the traffic police did not prohibit further registrations or transfers of the Honda.
As a result, the car changed hands to another person and eventually found its way to a car dealer in Omsk, where the eventual buyer took possession of it.
“The buyer will not understand that the car is by car”
The court found the former Honda owner guilty of using the vehicle as a tool in the crime and ordered it to be confiscated for the benefit of the state. In 2024, Silkov noted that the executive officer filed a request with the court to seize the car from the current owner.
He added that the ruling took effect only after two and a half years, creating complications for the chain of ownership, especially for the currentholder.
“If the car is kept under storage while the case is under investigation or under consideration in court, restrictions on it are not always applied. The investigator has a record in the criminal case, but there is no information that the vehicle is singled out as significant evidence elsewhere in the system. It remains under standard control, and the buyer might not realize that the car is involved as evidence.”
He argued that such scenarios can arise in investigations under a range of charges, with a vehicle sometimes appearing as material evidence in cases involving robbery or fraud.
“If a court decides to confiscate the car, the final buyer may only seek monetary compensation from the seller, in this case a car dealership. The transfer of ownership path is typically interrupted by the court order, as explained to Auto-juader Lev Voropaev by Gazeta.ru.”
The executive officers implement the court decision as part of the criminal case. In civil proceedings, if the ultimate owner asserts good faith ownership, that assertion does not overturn the confiscation order.
What other material evidence do they sell
Current law allows confiscation of a vehicle within the framework of prosecuting a crime. For repeated driving offenses, the regional traffic police, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and the prosecutor routinely report these practices.
The state also recoups value from expensive cars when their owners lose licenses or are found guilty of specific offenses, translating into court-ordered seizures and transfers.
In March 2025, the Dyurtyulinsky Bashkiria Regional Court confiscated a Toyota Highlander belonging to a 60-year-old resident. The court ordered 240 hours of compulsory work, a two-year and six-month restriction on driving, and the confiscation of the vehicle, according to a report from the Republican prosecutor.
In 2024 in the Ulyanovsk region a Mitsubishi ASX, tied to the owner’s wife and subject to the driving ban, was ordered into state ownership after a medical examination requirement was not met. The court mandated 200 hours of compulsory work and transferred the car registered to the wife into state property.
Enforcement officers carry out many such seizures, particularly against drivers who accumulate fines and other debts. The Volgograd region office of the Federal Bailiff Service reported the seizure of a Lada Niva from a debtor with 153 unpaid traffic fines totaling 120 thousand rubles.
In practice, owners often rush to dispose of their vehicles to shield assets. If a vehicle is arrested for debt, settlement may allow release, but courts may still confiscate it in the broader legal context. Voropaev explained that the state is not obligated to satisfy every debt; a vehicle can be seized to satisfy obligations, with enforcement officers seizing the debtor’s intermediary property to cover debts.