G.R. No. A.M. No. P-88-157. April 23, 1993.
JUDGE MARIANO TUPAS, complainant, vs. LEO R. CABALLERO, respondent.

FACTS

Judge Mariano C. Tupas of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 4, Panabo, Davao, filed a sworn administrative complaint dated January 4, 1988, against respondent Leo R. Caballero, then Interpreter and Officer-in-Charge of the Office of the Clerk of Court of the same branch. The complaint alleged malversation and misappropriation of court funds, irregularities in the performance of duties, extortion, and gambling. Specifically, on October 16, 1986, Atty. Alberto Lumakang, counsel for the plaintiff in Civil Case No. 86-14, consigned P28,000.00 in court, which was received by Caballero as evidenced by Official Receipt No. 5793761. Official verification from the Municipal Treasurer of Panabo and all banks in the municipality certified that no such deposit was made by Caballero. Respondent admitted receipt of the amount in his Answer but claimed it remained “intact,” without providing proof or depositing it as required. Two additional complaints were later filed by Judge Tupas but were disregarded by the Court for procedural defects: the first lacked proof of service to respondent, and the second was not under oath. The case was referred to Executive Judge Marcial L. Fernandez for investigation. Despite notices sent through police stations, respondent failed to appear at the hearings, having changed his residence without notifying the Court.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Leo R. Caballero is administratively liable for gross dishonesty and gross misconduct in office, warranting dismissal from the service.

RULING

Yes, respondent is guilty of gross dishonesty and gross misconduct. The Court found that respondent’s failure to deposit the consigned P28,000.00 with the municipal treasurer constituted malversation and gross dishonesty, as established in Ancheta v. Hilario (96 SCRA 62 [1980]), where misappropriation of funds in trust renders a civil servant unfit for service. Respondent’s assertion that the amount was “intact” was deemed self-serving and insufficient, especially given his failure to comply with a court order to deliver the funds. His actions also violated Supreme Court Circular No. 5, Series of 1982, which mandates immediate deposit of fiduciary funds with the municipal treasurer. Additionally, respondent was found guilty of extorting money from litigants and converting property in custodia legis to personal use, as supported by witness testimony, constituting dishonesty and gross misconduct under Civil Service Commission Memorandum Circular No. 30, Series of 1989. The Court disregarded the additional complaints due to lack of procedural due process but upheld the original charges based on substantial evidence. Respondent’s absence during hearings, despite knowledge of the case, further indicated guilt. Accordingly, respondent was DISMISSED from government service, with forfeiture of all retirement benefits and accrued leave credits, and disqualified from future government employment. A copy of the resolution was forwarded to the Department of Justice for possible criminal investigation.