'Defective' Car Endorsement: Rajasthan HC Stays FIR Against Shah Rukh Khan, Deepika Padukone
The FIR, lodged a few days back, named both actors along with six company officials, claiming they misled customers as Hyundai's brand ambassadors. Both Shah Rukh Khan and Deepika Padukone approached the Rajasthan High Court seeking the quashing of the FIR. Their legal teams argued that as brand ambassadors, their role was limited to product promotion and that they had no involvement in the company's technical operations.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Shah Rukh Khan, submitted that the actor has no direct connection with the quality of Hyundai's cars, and that it was unfair to implicate him in the case.
Advocate Madhav Mitra, representing Deepika Padukone, echoed similar arguments, stating that she cannot be held accountable for alleged manufacturing defects.
Hearing the matter in Jodhpur, Justice Sudesh Bansal observed that the FIR lacked a factual basis. The court then ordered a stay on the FIR, providing interim relief to both actors and the company officials.
The next hearing has been scheduled for September 25.
The case stems from a complaint by a Bharatpur resident who accused Hyundai Motors of selling him a technically defective car, resulting in financial losses. The FIR alleged that since Shah Rukh Khan and Deepika Padukone endorsed the brand, they too were responsible for misleading customers.
However, the actors maintain that the charges are not legally sustainable, as brand endorsements do not equate to accountability for product defects.
In the Rajasthan High Court hearing, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appeared for Shah Rukh Khan, Senior Advocate Madhav Mitra represented Deepika Padukone, and Senior Advocate Vivek Raj Bajwa argued on behalf of Hyundai MD Anso Kim.
The bench, after hearing the arguments, granted interim relief to all petitioners by staying the FIR filed in Bharatpur. The petitions filed by Shah Rukh Khan, Deepika Padukone, Anso Kim, and another company official emphasised that there were no specific allegations made against them.
The defence further argued that the complainant, advocate Kirti Singh, had been using the car for nearly three years and had already driven it for more than 67,000 kilometres. If he had genuine grievances, they said, he could have approached the consumer court instead of lodging an FIR. The petitioners maintained that registering a criminal case in such circumstances was not legally justified.

Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the
information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept
any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images,
videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information
contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright
issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.
Most popular stories
Market Research

- Bitcoin Adoption On Sui Accelerates As Threshold Network And Sui Launch Phase 2 Of Tbtc Integration
- Meme Coin Little Pepe Raises Above $24M In Presale With Over 39,000 Holders
- Schoenherr Welcomes Top-Tier CEE English Law Debt Finance Team
- Japan Buy Now Pay Later Market Size To Surpass USD 145.5 Billion By 2033 CAGR Of 22.23%
- United States Insulin Pumps Market Forecast On Share & Demand Mapping 20252033
- Mediafuse Joins Google For Startups Cloud Program To Scale AI-Driven, Industry-Focused PR Distribution
Comments
No comment