As per case facts, respondent No.2's marriage to Daljit Singh led to disputes. After a police inquiry found dowry allegations false, and only Daljit Singh was challaned for Section 498A, ... 406 IPC, respondent No.2 trial testimony made vague allegations against other family members (petitioners). The JMIC dismissed an application to summon petitioners as additional accused, but the Additional Sessions Judge reversed this order, leading to the current petitions before the High Court. The question arose whether the Additional Sessions Judge erred in summoning the petitioners based on general allegations without giving them a hearing, especially given the strict criteria for Section 319 Cr.P.C. Finally, applying principles laid down by the Supreme Court, the High Court ruled that the Additional Sessions Judge's Order was unsustainable as it was passed without hearing the petitioners and was based on vague, omnibus allegations lacking specific roles, failing to meet the high standard required for summoning additional accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Therefore, the Order to summon was set aside.