Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh – Shivam Mishra, the son of a prominent tobacco tycoon, was granted bail within hours of his arrest following a road accident involving his Lamborghini near the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Kanpur gate. The court, presided over by Judicial Magistrate (Additional Civil Judge Junior Division I) Smriti Srivastava, cited "serious procedural lapses" by the Kanpur Police as the primary reason for the rapid bail approval.

The incident occurred early on a Sunday morning when Mishra’s Lamborghini collided with a two-wheeler, injuring Sandeep Kumar, a delivery executive. Following the accident, Mishra was apprehended by authorities. However, his legal team successfully secured his release on bail later the same day, a development that has drawn public scrutiny.

The court's observations highlighted several deficiencies in the police's submission of evidence, which ultimately weakened the prosecution's immediate case. Key details noted by the court include:

  • Lack of Medical Examination Report: Police failed to present a medical examination report confirming whether Mishra was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the accident. While a breathalyzer test was reportedly conducted, its official results were not submitted.
  • Absence of Witness Statements: No statements from eyewitnesses to the accident were provided to the court, despite the potential availability of such accounts.
  • Missing CCTV Footage: Crucial CCTV footage from the accident site, which could have provided objective evidence of the collision, was also not presented.

Shivam Mishra was booked under Sections 279 (rash driving), 338 (causing grievous hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others), and 427 (mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). All these sections are bailable offenses, allowing an accused to be released on bail by the police or a court as a matter of right upon furnishing a bail bond.

Police had reportedly indicated intentions to include Section 304A (causing death by negligence), which is a non-bailable offense. However, this section was not formally added to the First Information Report (FIR) at the time of Mishra's arrest and court appearance. This omission, coupled with the lack of substantiating evidence for more serious charges, played a critical role in the court's decision.

Mishra’s legal counsel argued that without concrete evidence such as a medical report or witness testimonies, and given that the charges currently filed were bailable, their client was entitled to bail. The court concurred, emphasizing that the procedural deficiencies by the investigating agency left no grounds to deny bail under the applied sections.

Following the court's decision, Kanpur Police stated their intention to continue the investigation thoroughly. Officials indicated that they would gather the necessary evidence, including the medical report, witness statements, and CCTV footage. They further stated that additional charges, potentially including Section 304A, could be added to the case later based on the findings of the ongoing investigation. The police have a period of 90 days to file a charge sheet in the matter.

The rapid granting of bail and the court's pointed remarks regarding police conduct have sparked discussions regarding investigative diligence and procedural adherence in high-profile cases. The outcome of the ongoing police investigation and any subsequent legal proceedings remain subject to public and judicial observation.