A publicity stunt by used-car platform Cars24, involving a branded boat on a waterlogged road in Gurugram, has sparked controversy after the company initially claimed that the police had imposed a ₹50,000 fine and seized the boat. The Gurugram traffic police, however, denied taking any such action, following which Cars24 clarified that the ₹50,000 mentioned in its social media communication was the cost of the marketing activation and not a traffic challan.
In her post, Ms Sharma said the company had put the boat on a flooded road as a joke about the rain and claimed that the police arrived within minutes and imposed a ₹50,000 challan.
“₹50,000. That is what it cost us to break the law in Gurgaon last week. The crime: a boat. The location: a road. The road: a river,” Ms Sharma wrote.
She added, “We put a Cars24 boat in the water as a joke about the rain. The flooding has been arriving for years, and has never cost anyone anything.”
The post included an image of the branded boat being used on the flooded road, with people rowing it through the water.
Ms Sharma also wrote that the stunt took an unexpected turn when stranded people began using the boat to cross the waterlogged stretch.
“People started getting in to get home because rowing was the fastest way across. A joke stops being funny the moment it becomes a commute,” she wrote.
She further said Cars24 had paid for the boat and suggested that it would be willing to pay the alleged fine again if it was required to deploy the boat to help people during further flooding.
“Still waiting for someone to be billed for the water and sincerely hoping this does grab the right eyeballs,” Ms Sharma wrote.
She also captioned the photograph: “Issue a challan to the one responsible for the waterlogging as well.”
Traffic Police Deny Issuing Any Challan
Satyapal Yadav, assistant commissioner of police (ACP) for traffic, said the traffic police had neither issued a challan nor received any complaint concerning the incident.
“We have received no complaints in this regard, nor have we issued any challans. It cannot even be said whether the photo circulating on social media is from this year or not,” Mr Yadav said.
The officer also made it clear that the Gurugram traffic police had no role in the matter.
A senior police officer said the social media post had sparked the controversy and that the person who originally posted it would be best positioned to explain the circumstances surrounding the claim.
Cars24 Changes Its Position and Apologises
Cars24 subsequently issued an official statement seeking to clarify the controversy and apologised to the Gurugram administration, Gurugram police and other authorities.
The company said the ₹50,000 figure mentioned in its communication was not a traffic challan.
“In light of the discussions surrounding our recent Gurugram flooding post, we would like to clarify that the ₹50,000 figure mentioned in the communication was not a traffic challan, and no challan was issued in connection with the activity by any police authority. The amount referred to the cost involved in executing the marketing activation,” the company said.
Cars24 said the boat was part of a light-hearted marketing exercise intended to comment on the waterlogging situation in Gurugram.
“The post was created as a light-hearted marketing activation in response to the flooding situation in Gurugram. We understand that taking a boat out on a public road is not safe, and the activity was never intended to encourage or promote such behaviour,” the statement said.
The company also acknowledged that the manner in which the campaign was executed had created confusion over the role of the police and civic authorities.
“It was never our intention to cause any misunderstanding regarding the role, responsibilities, or actions of the Gurugram administration or the Police,” it said.
Cars24 went on to accept responsibility for the controversy. “We sincerely and unreservedly apologise to the Gurugram administration, the Gurugram police, and all concerned authorities. We acknowledge that the manner in which this campaign was executed was irresponsible and resulted in confusion by wrongly attributing an enforcement action to the Police that never took place,” the company said.
“We take full responsibility for this lapse and deeply regret the unwarranted criticism and inconvenience caused to the authorities as a consequence,” it added.
The company also apologised to members of the public who were misled or offended by the post and subsequent discussions.
Boat Stunt Turns into Debate over Gurugram’s Waterlogging
While the alleged challan became the immediate focus of the controversy, the incident also revived a larger debate over Gurugram’s recurring waterlogging and the city’s infrastructure.
The image of people using the Cars24 boat to cross the flooded road drew considerable attention online. Some users argued that the fact that stranded commuters found the boat useful highlighted the severity of the problem.
“The boat may have been the headline, but the real story is that people found it useful. When a joke starts solving a real problem, it says more about the infrastructure than the campaign itself,” one user commented.
Another user questioned the legal basis for the alleged challan and asked what offence had been recorded.
Others raised safety concerns. One commenter suggested that the absence of life jackets could have been a reason for enforcement action, while another warned that floodwater could contain sewage, debris and electrical hazards.
The debate also touched on whether marketing campaigns should use civic failures as a backdrop for brand promotion.
One user argued that by putting a boat on a flooded road, a campaign intended to highlight the problem could inadvertently normalise the situation rather than draw attention to its underlying causes.
Another commenter said the stunt had inserted the brand into a problem that residents were already facing, but questioned whether such participation risked turning a serious infrastructure failure into a marketing opportunity.
However, Cars24's clarification significantly changes the nature of the original controversy.
The initial social media post portrayed the ₹50,000 amount as the cost of an alleged police challan for deploying the boat on a public road. The Gurugram traffic police subsequently denied issuing any challan, while Cars24 formally acknowledged that the amount was actually the cost of executing its marketing activation.
The company has now apologised for wrongly attributing an enforcement action to the police and accepted responsibility for the resulting confusion.
At the same time, the incident has put Gurugram’s recurring monsoon waterlogging back in the spotlight. What began as a branded stunt intended to poke fun at flooded roads quickly became a discussion about the point at which satire, advertising and a genuine public-safety problem intersect.
