G.R. No. 94143 September 24, 1991
EDGAR SADIO, petitioner, vs. Hon. REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF ANTIQUE, BRANCH 10, SIXTH JUDICIAL REGION, San Jose, Antique, and BONIFACIO SANZ MACEDA, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Edgar Sadio filed a criminal complaint for violation of Article 206 of the Revised Penal Code (Unjust Interlocutory Order) against Judge Bonifacio Sanz Maceda, who had earlier declared a small town lottery operation illegal and ordered Sadio to pay damages. The Municipal Trial Court (MTC), presided by Judge Ma. Monina Misajon, dismissed the complaint, finding that Sadio had been accorded due process. Sadio filed a notice of appeal, which Judge Misajon initially approved but later recalled via an amendatory order, ruling that the offended party lacks the prerogative to appeal a dismissal, which belongs solely to the prosecutor. Sadio then filed a petition for certiorari and mandamus before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) to challenge the recall order. Judge Marvie R. Abraham-Singson of the RTC dismissed this petition outright for insufficiency in form and substance.

ISSUE

The primary issues are: (1) whether the RTC could motu proprio dismiss the petition for certiorari; (2) whether the MTC could dismiss the criminal complaint under the Rule on Summary Procedure without the accused’s counter-affidavit; (3) whether an offended party has the right to appeal the dismissal of a criminal complaint; and (4) whether an order approving a notice of appeal can be withdrawn.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition. On the first issue, the Court held that under Section 6, Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, a court may dismiss a petition outright if it is insufficient in form and substance. The RTC correctly dismissed the petition as Sadio failed to attach a certified true copy of the challenged order and his petition lacked substantive argument, jurisprudence, or legal citation. On the second issue, the Court found that Judge Misajon validly treated Judge Maceda’s order in the related civil case as a sufficient counter-affidavit under the Rule on Summary Procedure, making a separate affidavit a mere formality. On the third issue, the Court ruled that Sadio, as a mere complaining witness, had no right to appeal the dismissal. The civil action was deemed extinguished with the criminal dismissal since Judge Misajon’s order completely exonerated Judge Maceda, finding no denial of due process. Only the prosecutor could appeal the criminal aspect, which he did not. Consequently, the fourth issue was rendered moot, as the initial approval of the notice of appeal was erroneous and its recall was a valid rectification.