ORDER This criminal petition is filed by the petitioners/respondents under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash proceedings in DVC No.3 of 2008 pending on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mandanapalle, Chittoor District, registered for offences punishable under Sections 12, 18, 19 and 20 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. 2. Whereas the petitioners are the respondents, the respondent No.1 is the petitioner in DVC No.3 of 2008. For the sake of convenience, I refer the parties as arrayed in the Domestic Violence Case. 3. The petitioner has filed the Domestic Violence Case against the respondents who according to her are her husband, father-in law, husband of her sister-in-law and her sister-in-law respectively, on the ground that they subjected her to mental and physical torture for the purpose of bringing additional dowry and had taken away all her gold ornaments and further they are also liable to provide her necessary shelter, maintenance, counselling and separate residence and return her gold ornaments and pay necessary compensation and damages for the injuries and mental torture and emotional distress sustained by her taking recourse under Sections 14, 18 and 20 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. 4. Section 14 of the Act provides for giving necessary counselling. Further, Section 18 of the Act is with regards to passing protection order about domestic violence. Section 19 of the Act provides for giving protection to her from being disposed from the place of her shared residence or renouncing her rights therein. Section 20 of the Act provides for extending necessary monetary reliefs to meet necessary legal ingredients and necessary loss sustained by her relatives i.e., loss of earnings, necessary medical expenses and so on. 5. Section 19 of the Act provides for giving protection to her from being disposed from the place of her shared residence or renouncing her rights therein. Section 20 of the Act provides for extending necessary monetary reliefs to meet necessary legal ingredients and necessary loss sustained by her relatives i.e., loss of earnings, necessary medical expenses and so on. 5. It is the contention of learned Counsel for the respondents that because the parties happened to be Muslims and consequently the marriage between the petitioner and respondent No.1, if any, is only a contract there should be some authenticated documentary evidence with regards to the performance of their marriage and without producing that it cannot be said that there is prima facie proof of the performance of marriage between them and further by virtue of Section 27 of the Act, she got right to file the case in the Court within the jurisdiction of which she resides permanently or temporarily but nowhere it is stated by her that she resides at Madanapalle to bring the case within the ambit of the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Madanapalle and further in any case, the respondents 3 and 4, do not fall within the scope of the provisions of this Act. 6. Therefore, it is to be seen as to whether there is prima facie material with regards to the existence of a valid marriage between the petitioner and respondent No.1 and whether the Court at Madanapalle has got jurisdiction to entertain the matter and further in any case whether the respondents 3 and 4 come within the ambit of the provisions of the Act? 7. As per the complaint, her temporary residence is shown as Door No.1-543-F, Upstairs, Ammineni Street, Madanapalle Town and Mandal, Chittoor District. In fact, nowhere it is stated in the complaint that she is a temporary resident of Madanapalle. However, it is purely a question of fact, which is to be decided basing upon necessary evidence to be recorded. The temporary residence given by her in the cause title is also to be taken into consideration for the purpose of deciding the jurisdiction of the Court subject to proving the authenticity of it 8. However, it is purely a question of fact, which is to be decided basing upon necessary evidence to be recorded. The temporary residence given by her in the cause title is also to be taken into consideration for the purpose of deciding the jurisdiction of the Court subject to proving the authenticity of it 8. However, it is represented that so far as the questions of existence of marriage and residence are concerned, the lower Court may be given necessary directions to dispose of those aspects as preliminary issues. 9. With regards to the applicability of the provisions of the Act to the respondents 3 and 4: Section 2(e) of the Act provides, "Aggrieved person" means any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to any act of domestic violence by the respondent; Section 2(f) of the Act provides, "Domestic relationship" means a relationship between two persons who live or have, at any point of time-lived together in a shared household, when they are related by consanguinity, marriage, or through a relationship in the nature of marriage, adoption or are family members living together as a joint family." 10. So, in order to attract the provisions of Sections 14, 18 and 20 of the Act, these definitions should be satisfied with. In other words, in order to attract all the provisions of the Act, the respondents 3 and 4 should have lived together along with the petitioner i.e. aggrieved person and respondent No.1 in a shared household subject to the satisfaction of the other formalities of marriage or their relationship by virtue of the marriage or adoption or as family members and so on. Whereas according to the petitioner her marriage with the respondent No.1 took place on 29.9.2005, there is no record with regards to the date of marriage between the respondent Nos.3 and 4. According to the learned Counsel for the respondents they (R3 and R4) are residing at Piler, Chittoor District. Unless there is specific mention in this context, to the effect that they all lived or living in a shared house together they cannot be parties to the proceedings with reference to the reliefs prayed for. In view of the discussion made if they (R3 and R4) harassed her, the petitioner can take recourse against her under other provisions of law applicable. 11. In view of the discussion made if they (R3 and R4) harassed her, the petitioner can take recourse against her under other provisions of law applicable. 11. Therefore, there is no prima facie material to proceed against the respondents 3 and 4 in the matter. Hence, the petition is to be quashed so far as the respondent Nos.3 and 4 are concerned. In the light of the foregoing discussion, the criminal petition is allowed quashing the entire proceedings in DVC No.3 of 2008 pending of the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Madanapalle, Chittoor District, insofar as the respondent Nos.3 and 4 are concerned and the criminal petition insofar as respondent Nos.1 and 2 are concerned, it is dismissed. However, the learned Judicial Magistrate of the First Class at Madanapalle, Chittoor District is directed to dispose of the matter against the respondent Nos.1 and 2 within a period of six (6) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, in the light of the pleas taken by them.