Short answer. Not necessarily. Rule 119, Section 19 says you will not be discharged if good cause exists to detain you. Instead, the court commits you to answer for the proper offense and dismisses the original case only once the proper information is filed — dismissal and continued custody can happen together.
What the law says
When it becomes manifest at any time before judgment that a mistake has been made in charging the proper offense and the accused cannot be convicted of the offense charged or any other offense necessarily included therein, the accused shall not be discharged if there appears good cause to detain him.
Rule 119, Section 19 — When mistake has been made in charging the proper offense. Read the full provision →
What the law says
In such case, the court shall commit the accused to answer for the proper offense and dismiss the original case upon the filing of the proper information.
Rule 119, Section 19 — When mistake has been made in charging the proper offense. Read the full provision →
When Section 19 applies
This provision addresses a specific mismatch: it becomes clear before judgment that the prosecution charged the wrong offense, and the accused cannot be convicted either of the offense actually charged or of any offense necessarily included in it. That is a charging-document problem, not a question of the accused's innocence. It can arise, for example, where trial evidence reveals the acts proven fit a different offense entirely than the one originally filed. The timing matters too — this section applies only where the mistake surfaces before judgment, not after conviction, which is governed by other provisions entirely.
Discovering the mistake does not mean automatic release
The rule is careful not to let a charging error become a free pass. If good cause appears to detain the accused, the accused is not discharged simply because the wrong offense was charged — the mistake in the paperwork does not erase the underlying basis for holding the person. The rule instead separates the question of whether the charging document was correct from the separate question of whether continued detention is still warranted on the merits. Whether good cause exists is itself a factual determination for the court to make, not something either side can simply assert.
Dismissal and re-charging happen together
The court's remedy is to commit the accused to answer for the proper offense while dismissing the original, mischarged case — but that dismissal takes effect only upon the filing of the proper information. In practice, the accused moves from one correctly framed case to another, without a gap where no charge covers him. This sequencing avoids a gap in which the accused would otherwise be free even though good cause to hold him for the correct offense still exists. The provision binds the prosecution as much as the court: the proper information still has to be filed before the original case is formally dismissed, so the correction cannot simply be left pending indefinitely.