G.R. No. L-61770. January 31, 1983.
JOSE S. BAGCAL, petitioner, vs. HON. ROLANDO R. VILLARAZA, Presiding Judge of the City Court of Cagayan de Oro City, Branch II, respondent.

FACTS

Petitioner Jose S. Bagcal was arrested without a warrant on February 28, 1982, and has since been detained. An information for murder was filed against him with the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) presided by respondent Judge Rolando R. Villaraza. This information was accompanied by affidavits but lacked the City Fiscal’s certification of a prior preliminary investigation. Judge Villaraza issued a warrant for Bagcal’s arrest without conducting a preliminary examination of the prosecution witnesses, meaning the affiants were not examined under oath or subjected to searching questions.
Bagcal filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, challenging the legality of his detention based on the irregularly issued warrant. After a hearing, Judge Eulalio D. Rosete denied the petition for release but ordered Judge Villaraza to promptly hear Bagcal’s pending petition for bail. Bagcal appealed, seeking immediate release, while Judge Villaraza sought clarification on his role regarding the bail hearing.

ISSUE

Whether the petitioner is entitled to release via habeas corpus due to the irregular issuance of the warrant of arrest.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed Judge Rosete’s decision with modification. The Court held that while the warrant of arrest was indeed irregularly issued because Judge Villaraza failed to conduct the mandatory preliminary examination—a judicial proceeding requiring the examination under oath and searching questions of the complainant and witnesses—this procedural defect was subsequently cured. The infirmity was cured when petitioner Bagcal voluntarily submitted to the jurisdiction of the court by actively seeking relief from it. His specific acts of applying for bail, submitting a supporting memorandum, and filing a motion for reconsideration after the denial of his bail application constituted a waiver of any objection to the legality of the warrant. Consequently, his continued detention was deemed lawful, and habeas corpus would not lie.
However, the Court modified the directive regarding the bail hearing. It ordered that the hearing on the application for bail be conducted by the Executive Judge of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) in Cagayan de Oro City, not the MTC. This is because the charge is murder, a crime within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the RTC. The Executive Judge was instructed to determine whether the evidence of guilt is strong, granting bail if it is not, and denying it if it is. The case records were ordered elevated accordingly.