G.R. No. L-21805; February 25, 1967
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellant, vs. FIDEL TAN, defendant-appellee.

FACTS

The accused-appellee, Fidel Tan, was sentenced by the Court of First Instance of Samar to an indeterminate penalty. After his appeal was dismissed, the sentence became final, and he was committed to the Director of Prisons on March 2, 1959, via the provincial warden. Instead of remitting Tan to the national penitentiary, the provincial warden retained him in the Samar provincial jail. The warden unilaterally applied provisions on good conduct time allowance and released Tan on November 23, 1961, after an actual confinement of 2 years, 8 months, and 21 days. On September 6, 1962, the provincial fiscal moved for Tan’s re-arrest and recommitment to the national penitentiary, arguing the warden had no authority to release him. The lower court denied this motion, prompting the government’s appeal.

ISSUE

Whether the lower court erred in denying the motion for the re-arrest and recommitment of the accused-appellee, Fidel Tan, after his premature release by the provincial warden.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s order. The provincial warden had no authority to retain an insular prisoner (sentenced to more than one year) in the provincial jail without proper authorization or to grant good conduct time allowance, a power vested exclusively in the Director of Prisons under Article 99 of the Revised Penal Code. The accused’s release was premature; even with maximum good conduct allowance, he had an unserved portion of his sentence. The lower court retained jurisdiction to ensure the execution of its sentence. Re-arresting Tan would not constitute double jeopardy or a deprivation of liberty without due process, as his re-incarceration was merely a continuation of his unserved penalty, not a new conviction. The Supreme Court ordered Tan’s re-arrest and the continuance of his imprisonment for the unserved term.