G.R. No. A.M. No. MTJ-92-687. February 9, 1994.
Engineer Edgardo C. Garcia, complainant, vs. Judge Meljohn de la Peña, Municipal Circuit Trial Court, Caibiran-Culaba, Leyte [Acting Judge, Municipal Trial Court, Naval, Leyte], respondent.

FACTS

Complainant Engineer Edgardo C. Garcia charged respondent Judge Meljohn de la Peña, acting judge of the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Naval, Leyte, with partiality, abuse of authority, and grave abuse of discretion in connection with Criminal Case No. 2577 for grave oral defamation filed by the respondent judge’s brother, Dr. Melencio de la Peña, against complainant’s wife, Ignacia G. Garcia. The complainant alleged that: (1) respondent judge took cognizance of the case without the requisite certification from the Lupon Tagapayapa; (2) he should have inhibited himself as the private complainant is his brother; (3) he issued a warrant of arrest without accompanying copies of the complaint and affidavits; (4) on June 8, 1992, after the accused was arrested and a cash bail bond was posted, the respondent judge was not in his office to approve the bond and release order; (5) the judge had left for Cebu, entrusting the signed release order to his wife instead of the clerk of court, causing the accused’s detention for about 20 hours until the order was obtained the next day; and (6) they received copies of the complaint and the judge’s inhibition order only on June 15, 1992. In his comment, respondent judge argued that no barangay certification was required for grave oral defamation, inhibition was not necessary to mobilize justice, issuing the warrant was a ministerial duty, the cash bond was defective for lacking a written undertaking, and he had left the release order with his wife as he had a pre-scheduled medical check-up in Cebu.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Judge Meljohn de la Peña is administratively liable for taking cognizance of and acting on a criminal case where the private complainant is his brother, and for the subsequent incidents that delayed the accused’s release on bail.

RULING

Yes, respondent judge is administratively liable. The Court found that respondent judge violated the rule on compulsory disqualification under Section 1, Rule 137 of the Rules of Court, which prohibits a judge from sitting in any case where he is related to either party within the sixth degree of consanguinity. The private complainant is his brother, a relative within the second degree. This violation is patent and compromises the impartiality and integrity of the judiciary. His excuse that the case had been delayed and he needed to “mobilize the machinery of justice” is unjustifiable. He should have sought the designation of another judge. His actions after issuing the warrant—leaving for Cebu and entrusting the release order to his wife instead of the clerk of court—demonstrated gross ignorance of proper procedure, indifference, and aggravated the injustice, causing the accused undue detention. While the Court agreed that a barangay certification was not required for grave oral defamation, the gross violation of disqualification rules and subsequent mishandling constitute serious misconduct. Accordingly, respondent Judge Meljohn de la Peña is DISMISSED from service with forfeiture of all benefits and with prejudice to reinstatement or reappointment to any public office.