Accused Shivam Mishra (centre) and his father KK Mishra (right)

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.“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 vs Union of India case,” the additional chief judicial magistrate (ACJM) said.After arresting Mishra, son of tobacco baron KK Mishra, the police produced him before the court around 10 am, seeking 14 days of judicial custody.However, the court rejected the police’s plea and instead granted him bail on a personal bond of ₹20,000, according to Anant Sharma, Mishra’s counsel.The crash took place around 3pm on Sunday when a Lamborghini Revuelto, an Italian luxury sports car worth over Rs 10 crore, rammed into pedestrians and vehicles.Mohd Taufeeq, 18, an e-rickshaw driver injured in the crash, lodged a complaint. However, 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 Mohan Lal’s surrender application, 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 counsel have maintained that he was not driving the Lamborghini at the time of the accident.They claimed that a hired driver 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.Mishra’s father 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.The case has attracted widespread public attention, with social media users alleging preferential treatment and delayed action by law enforcement in the immediate aftermath of the crash.