Filing of Charge-Sheet Without Additional Copies Under Section 193(8) BNSS Does Not Entitle Accused to Default Bail
Case Name: Shaurya Sunil Kumar Singh v. Central Bureau of Investigation
Citation: 2026 INSC 666
Date of Judgment/Order: 1 July 2026
Bench: Sanjay Karol, J. and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, J.
Held: The Supreme Court held that default bail under BNSS cannot be claimed merely on the ground that additional copies of the charge-sheet or police report were not filed or supplied as contemplated under Section 193(8) BNSS. The right to default bail arises only when the investigating agency fails to file the charge-sheet within the prescribed statutory period under Section 187(3) BNSS. Once a police report complying with Section 193(3) BNSS is filed within time, the right to default bail stands extinguished, and any alleged non-compliance regarding additional copies or supply of documents does not vitiate the charge-sheet or revive the accused’s right to statutory bail.
Summary: The appellant, accused in a CBI case concerning alleged cyber fraud, mule accounts and transfer of proceeds of crime, sought default bail on the ground that though the charge-sheet was filed on 02.09.2025, copies of the charge-sheet and related documents were not filed and supplied to him within the statutory period. The Special Judge rejected the application, and the Bombay High Court affirmed the rejection, holding that default bail is attracted only where the charge-sheet itself is not filed within the prescribed time. The Supreme Court examined Sections 187, 193 and 230 BNSS along with the corresponding provisions of the CrPC and held that Section 193(8) BNSS, which requires submission of copies for supply to the accused, cannot be equated with the filing of the police report itself. Relying on earlier decisions including Judgebir Singh, Kapil Wadhawan, R.S. Pai and Narendra Kumar Amin, the Court held that non-filing of all documents or copies does not invalidate a charge-sheet otherwise filed in proper form within time.
Decision: The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Bombay High Court’s order dated 06.02.2026 in CRA No. 475 of 2025. The Court held that the appellant was not entitled to default bail since the charge-sheet/police report had been filed before the Magistrate within the prescribed statutory period on 02.09.2025 and was in compliance with Section 193(3) BNSS. The Court clarified that the appellant’s regular bail application, if any, must be considered independently on its own merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the dismissal of the default bail plea. Pending applications were disposed of.