As per case facts, the appellant, an informant and prosecution witness (PW-9), identified three individuals as assailants during a Sessions Trial who were named in the FIR but not charged. ... The Trial Court summoned them as additional accused under Section 319 CrPC. However, the High Court set aside the summoning order for one accused (Ramesh Gandhi), stating he was innocent during investigation and fled without using his weapon, suggesting false implication. The question arose whether the High Court erred by evaluating the merits of the evidence and making presumptions of innocence at the preliminary Section 319 CrPC stage. Finally, the Supreme Court held the High Court committed a grave error. The Court clarified that Section 319 CrPC only requires a prima facie case with stronger evidence than mere probability of complicity, not a conclusive finding of guilt. Given charges including Section 149 IPC, specific individual roles are often immaterial, as mere presence in an unlawful assembly suffices. The trial court was correct in summoning the accused based on eye-witness testimony, and the trial must proceed to uncover the truth.