Kanpur Lamborghini crash: Court cites ‘serious procedural lapses’ by cops; why tobacco tycoon’s son Shivam Mishra got bail | India News

Accused Shivam Mishra (centre)

NEW DELHI: A local court in Kanpur criticised the police for procedural lapses as it granted bail to VVIP brat Shivam Mishra just hours after his arrest on Thursday, four days after a high-end Lamborghini, allegedly driven by Mishra, crashed into pedestrians, injuring six.Also Read | Kanpur Lamborghini crash: Arrested after 4 days, Shivam Mishra secures bail within hours“There were serious procedural lapses by the police. The arrest was carried out without proper notice under the BNSS (Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita) and violated Supreme Court guidelines set in the Arnesh Kumar case,” the additional chief judicial magistrate (ACJM) said.

Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar (2014), also known as the Arnesh Kumar Guidelines, is a landmark judgment of the Supreme Court, stating arrests should be an exception in cases where the punishment is less than seven years of imprisonment.Meanwhile, after his arrest, Mishra, son of tobacco baron KK Mishra, was produced before the court around 10 am, with the police seeking 14 days of judicial custody.However, the court rejected the plea and instead granted him bail on a personal bond of Rs 20,000, according to Anant Sharma, Mishra’s counsel.The crash took place around 3 pm on Sunday when a Lamborghini Revuelto, an Italian luxury sports car worth over Rs 10 crore, rammed into pedestrians and vehicles on Kanpur’s VIP Road.Mohd Taufeeq, 18, an e-rickshaw driver injured in the crash, lodged a complaint. However, the counsel for the accused later claimed that Taufeeq was “not keen” on pursuing legal action.Police said their preliminary probe, supported by CCTV footage and eyewitness accounts, indicated that the car was speeding before the collision.Videos circulating on social media appear to show private security personnel pulling a man believed to be Mishra out of the driver’s seat immediately after the crash and taking him away in another SUV.Initially, the First Information Report (FIR) named an “unidentified driver” as the accused. It was later amended to include Shivam Mishra after what police described as preliminary evidence linking him to the vehicle.In Wednesday’s hearing, the local court rejected the surrender application of Mohan Lal, Mishra’s driver, observing that his name did not appear in the FIR and that available evidence pointed to Mishra as the driver.While police have stood by their findings, Mishra’s father and his lawyer have maintained that he was not driving the Lamborghini at the time of the accident.They claimed that Lal was at the wheel and that Mishra was unwell and suffered a medical episode during the ride — a condition his family says could have contributed to the mishap.KK Mishra also alleged that the car had experienced a “technical issue” prior to the crash. Officials said these claims are expected to be examined as part of the ongoing investigation, including potential medical and forensic evaluations.