G.R. No. A.M. No. RTJ-91-764. October 19, 1992.
Pete M. Pico vs. Judge Alfonso V. Combong.

FACTS

Complainant Pete M. Pico is the brother of Narciso M. Pico, a minister who was shot to death on January 10, 1991. An information for murder was filed against Eddie Villegas, with a recommendation of no bail. The case was docketed as Criminal Case No. 667 in the Regional Trial Court of La Carlota City, presided over by respondent Judge Alfonso V. Combong. On July 17, 1991, the judge issued a warrant for the arrest of Villegas, which included the words “no bail recommended.” On August 6, 1991, complainant discovered that the accused had been granted bail on August 2, 1991, and released upon posting a P50,000.00 bond. Complainant charges the respondent Judge with serious misconduct and grave abuse of discretion for granting bail without notice and hearing, and even before the accused had been arrested or detained. The prosecution received a copy of the motion for bail only on August 7, 1991, and moved for a hearing on August 9, 1991. Respondent Judge, in his comment, admitted failing to hold a hearing but denied granting bail prior to arrest. He claimed oversight in not requiring proof of custody and stated he was convinced the possibility of flight was “practically nil.”

ISSUE

Whether respondent Judge Alfonso V. Combong committed serious misconduct and grave abuse of discretion in granting bail to an accused charged with murder, an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua, without the accused being in custody and without conducting a hearing.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court found respondent Judge guilty of serious misconduct. A person applying for bail must be in the custody of the law. The judge should have ascertained that he had jurisdiction over the body of the accused before considering the bail application. For an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua, a hearing is mandatory to allow the prosecution to prove that evidence of guilt is strong. The judge’s deliberate failure to hold a hearing deprived the People of due process and constituted arbitrary, capricious, and whimsical action, reflecting gross ignorance of the law or cavalier disregard of its requirements. His personal impression about the accused’s likelihood of flight was not a valid basis. The Court fined Judge Alfonso V. Combong Twenty Thousand Pesos (P20,000.00), censured and warned him, and required him to submit a certified true copy of the death certificate of the accused Eddie Villegas, who was reportedly shot dead on February 22, 1992.