Supreme Court Holds That Bail to an Accused Summoned Under Section 319 CrPC Requires Assessment of Strong and Cogent Evidence Beyond Mere Prima Facie Involvement

Case Name: Md. Imran @ D.C. Guddu v. State of Jharkhand (with connected appeal)
Citation: 2026 INSC 36
Date of Judgment/Order: 07 January 2026
Bench: Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K.V. Viswanathan

Held: The Supreme Court held that when an accused is summoned to face trial under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the consideration for grant of bail must be based on the existence of strong and cogent evidence indicating the person’s involvement in the offence, a standard higher than mere prima facie satisfaction required for framing of charge but lower than proof beyond reasonable doubt sufficient for conviction.

Summary: The appeals arose from proceedings relating to a murder case in which nine persons were originally named in the FIR, but chargesheet was filed only against three accused. During trial, eyewitnesses deposed about the involvement of all nine persons, leading the complainant to file an application under Section 319 CrPC. The trial court partly allowed the application and summoned three additional accused, including the appellant. The appellant was arrested pursuant to a non-bailable warrant and his bail application was rejected by the High Court, while two other similarly placed co-accused were granted anticipatory bail. The Supreme Court examined the evidentiary basis for summoning under Section 319, the parity between the accused, and the correct legal test for bail at that stage, noting that the trial against the newly added accused had to recommence and that they were cooperating with the proceedings.

Decision: The appeal filed by Md. Imran @ D.C. Guddu was allowed and he was directed to be released on bail subject to conditions imposed by the trial court, while the appeal filed by the State of Jharkhand seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the other two co-accused was dismissed, with directions that all accused shall regularly appear before the trial court and that the trial shall proceed uninfluenced by the observations made in the bail order, and all pending applications stood disposed of.