accordingly ordered the dismissal of Criminal Case No. M-PSY-23-00670-CR for adultery against Aurel and Michael. In so ruling, the MeTC Pasay City-Branch 167 held that the complaint-affidavit filed by Marvin, who was merely authorized by Jin to file the complaint on his behalf, cannot be considered sufficient compliance with the legal requirements for filing an adultery case, particularly, that it should be filed by the offended spouse. [9] Aggrieved, Jin through his counsel, moved for reconsideration, which was denied by the MeTC Pasay City-Branch 167 in a Resolution dated April 25, 2024. Thus, Jin filed a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court (Rule 65 Petition) with application for temporary restraining order, which was docketed before the Regional Trial Court of Pasay City, Branch 112 (RTC). Meanwhile, Criminal Case No. M-PSY-23-00669-CR for grave threats case was eventually transferred to the MeTC of Pasay City, Branch 165 (MeTC Pasay City-Branch 165). [10] The RTC Ruling In a Decision [11] dated October 21, 2024, the RTC ruled in Jin's favor, and accordingly, directed the MeTC Pasay City-Branch 167 to reinstate Criminal Case No. M-PSY-23-00670-CR for adultery filed by Jin against Aurel and Michael. In so ruling, it found that the MeTC Pasay City-Branch 167 gravely abused its discretion in dismissing the case due to Jin's failure to comply with the filing requirements for an adultery case. It held that the complaint-affidavit filed by Jin, which was attached to the complaint-affidavit by Marvin , sufficiently complied with the legal requirements for the filing of an adultery case. It observed that the complaint-affidavit executed by Jin: (a) narrated the facts and circumstances constituting the crime and explicitly and categorically charged Aurel and Michael of adultery; (b) contained all the elements of a valid complaint under Article 344 of the RPC and Rule 110, Section 5 of the Rules of Court; and (c) was attached to the Information as an integral part thereof, and duly filed to the court. Further, it found that Marvin's complaint-affidavit merely echoed Jin's averments in his complaint-affidavit, and clearly stated that he was only Jin's authorized representative. [12] Dissatisfied, Aurel moved for reconsideration, which was denied in an Order [13] dated November 13, 2024. Aurel then directly filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court with prayer for the issuance of a temporary restraining order and/or writ of preliminary injunction before this Court. [14] The Issue Before the Court The issue before this Court is whether the RTC erred in finding that Jin's complaint affidavit, which was attached to the complaint-affidavit filed by Marvin and the Information filed by the OCP-Pasay City before the MeTC Pasay City-Branch 167, can be considered as sufficient compliance with the requirements for filing an adultery case under Rule 110, Section 5 of the Rules of Court and Article 344 of th