The high-profile Lamborghini crash case in Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, has deepened in complexity with fresh legal twists and conflicting claims. Police have arrested Shivam Mishra, son of a prominent tobacco businessman, four days after the luxury car allegedly crashed into pedestrians and vehicles on VIP Road, injuring several people including e-rickshaw driver Mohammad Taufiq.
While investigators maintain that Mishra was behind the wheel at the time of the accident citing CCTV footage and eyewitness accounts a man named Mohan Lal has filed an affidavit claiming he was driving the car and that Mishra suffered a seizure moments before the collision.
A Kanpur court has rejected Lal’s plea to surrender and seek bail, observing that he was not named in the original FIR. With technical reports awaited and investigations ongoing, the case has turned into a battle of narratives between legal affidavits and police findings.
Arrest, Injuries and Conflicting Versions
The accident occurred on VIP Road in Kanpur when a Lamborghini Revuelto reportedly rammed into a three-wheeler and several pedestrians, leaving at least six people injured. Among them was 18-year-old e-rickshaw driver Mohammad Taufiq, who sustained serious leg injuries and later filed a formal complaint.
Based on his statement, police registered an FIR under sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023 related to rash and negligent driving and causing grievous hurt. Four days after the incident, Kanpur police arrested Shivam Mishra from a private hospital, where he was reportedly undergoing treatment. Authorities stated that preliminary evidence, including CCTV footage from the area, indicated that Mishra was driving the car at the time of the crash.
However, the defence has offered a starkly different version of events. Mohan Lal, who claims to be the permanent driver of the vehicle, approached the court with an affidavit taking responsibility for the accident. In earlier media interactions, Lal alleged that Mishra had suddenly suffered a seizure while seated beside him, causing him to lose control of the car. “The car was moving slowly. He fell on top of me and I got scared. I was holding him with one hand. The car hit a three-wheeler, climbed onto the divider and then stopped,” he told reporters. Mishra’s counsel Narendra Kumar Yadav confirmed that Lal had filed the affidavit, insisting that the driver alone was responsible and had remained in contact with the police throughout.
Court Rejects Driver’s Plea as Police Stand Firm
Despite these claims, the legal proceedings so far have favoured the police version. Mohan Lal submitted an application before a Kanpur court seeking to surrender and obtain bail, but the court dismissed his plea, noting that he was not named as an accused in the FIR and that available evidence did not support his claim. Investigators have repeatedly stated that technical and forensic examinations, along with CCTV visuals and witness testimonies, point towards Mishra as the driver.
Eyewitness accounts have further complicated the matter. Several bystanders alleged that the Lamborghini was moving at high speed and that immediately after the crash, bouncers accompanying the occupants rushed to the vehicle and pulled a person out.
These statements have strengthened police suspicions that attempts may have been made to shield the actual driver. Senior police officials have clarified that the luxury car has been seized and that its onboard data and other technical aspects are being analysed to determine the exact sequence of events.
The complainant, Taufiq, has meanwhile filed a compromise affidavit in court stating that Lal was driving the vehicle at the time of the accident. This development has raised questions about whether pressure or settlement efforts may be influencing the victim’s stand. Police, however, have emphasised that criminal investigations cannot be closed merely on the basis of private compromises and that the final outcome will depend on material evidence.
High-Profile Case Draws Public and Political Attention
Given the involvement of a wealthy business family and an expensive supercar, the incident has attracted widespread public attention and media scrutiny. Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath has reportedly sought strict action in the case, sending a message that no individual no matter how influential will be spared if found guilty. Local authorities have echoed this sentiment, stating that the law will take its own course.
Road safety activists and local residents have also voiced concerns over reckless driving and VIP culture. The crash has reignited debates about accountability when accidents involve powerful individuals, and whether justice can remain impartial under social and financial pressure. For now, police say they are awaiting detailed forensic reports and vehicle data to finalise their charge sheet.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
The Kanpur Lamborghini crash case is more than just a road accident it is a test of India’s commitment to equal justice. When influential individuals are involved, investigations often become entangled in competing claims, legal manoeuvres, and public relations battles. Yet, amid all this noise, the focus must remain on the victims who suffer physical, emotional, and financial harm.
True justice requires transparency, professionalism, and independence from pressure whether political, social, or monetary. Conflicting affidavits and compromise pleas should not overshadow hard evidence or dilute accountability. For ordinary citizens, faith in the legal system depends on seeing that privilege does not override responsibility.
