Supreme Court of India
PARTH SHARMA VS. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU on 27 October 2026
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. /2026
[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO.17589/2026]
PARTH SHARMA
Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU Respondent(s)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. This appeal arises from an order dated 07.09.2026 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras rejecting the regular bail prayer of the appellant in connection with Crime No.139 of 2026 registered with Sathuvachari P.S., Tamil Nadu.
4. As per the prosecution case, a parcel booked in the name of one Yuvraj Singh was received by the college administration. When the said
Digitally signed by KAVITA PAHUJA Date: 2026.10.28 17:13:54 IST
Reason:
Signature Not Verified
parcel was opened, ten strips of 100 tablets of Tapentadol Hydrocholoride of 100 mg were found. Based on material collected during investigation, the appellant was implicated.
5. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that his complicity is based on confessional statement of the co-accused. Besides, there is no basis to implicate the appellant for offences punishable under Sections 111 and 123 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
6. Additionally, it is submitted that even if those tablets were to be consumed or used by the appellant, since those drugs do not fall in the category of Narcotic and Psychotropic Substances, there would be no serious offence made out. Moreover, an offence punishable under Section 111 of BNS is not made out as there is no unlawful activity contemplated therein; besides, no more than one chargesheet in any such specified crime has been filed.
7. It has been also submitted that although in the counter affidavit it is stated that there is one more case registered against the appellant, but it has not come on record that after investigation any charge-sheet has been submitted in that case.
In
such circumstances, it is submitted, the appellant being a student is entitled to be released on bail. More so when there is no allegation that he has served or administered any drug to any person.
8. The learned counsel for the respondent-State has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute that complicity of the appellant is based on confessional statement of co- accused, and that there is no recovery of any incriminating article including drug from the appellant.
9. Having regard to the above, without expressing any opinion on merits of the prosecution case, we are of the view that the appellant is entitled to be released on bail in this case, pending trial.
10. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed. The order passed by the High Court rejecting the bail prayer of the appellant is set aside.
11. In the aforesaid case, the appellant shall be released on bail on such terms and conditions as the trial court may deem fit to impose in the facts and circumstances of the case.
12. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. …………………………………………………J [MANOJ MISRA] ……………………………………………………J [MANMOHAN] NEW DELHI OCTOBER 27, 2026 Crl.A. @ SLP (Crl.) No.17589/2026 4
ITEM NO.5 COURT NO.8 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PETITION(S) FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CRL.) NO(S). 17589/2026 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07-09-2026 in CRLOP No.24988/2026 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras] PARTH SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU Respondent(s) IA No. 281772/2026 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No. 281764/2026 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 281762/2026 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ ANNEXURES
Date : 27-10-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shoeb Alam, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sivagnanam Karthikeyan, Adv. Mr. Lakshay Singh, Adv. Mr. Tushar Giri- 4208, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. B. Karunakaran- 3845, AOR Mr. Fazil Shoiab, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order. The operative portion of the signed order reads thus: “10. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed. The order passed by the High Court rejecting the bail prayer of the appellant is set aside.
11. In the aforesaid case, the appellant shall be released on bail on such terms and conditions as the trial court may deem fit to impose in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
3. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (KAVITA PAHUJA) (SAPNA BANSAL) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH) [Signed order is placed on the file]