A.M. No. P-02-1643. April 1, 2003. DIMAS ABALDE, complainant, vs. ANTONIO ROQUE, JR., Sheriff IV, Regional Trial Court, Branch 29, Toledo City, respondent.
FACTS

Complainant Dimas Abalde was the prevailing party in a civil case. A writ of execution was issued to enforce a monetary award of P110,000.00. Respondent Sheriff Antonio Roque, Jr. accompanied the complainant to the bank to collect the judgment amount. However, the sheriff transacted alone and subsequently handed only P90,000.00 to the complainant, withholding P20,000.00. The sheriff claimed this balance was for execution expenses and would be remitted later.
Months later, the sheriff presented an unsubstantiated “Report of Sheriff’s Expenses” totaling P16,260.00, lacking official receipts. The complainant then filed an administrative complaint for grave misconduct. During the investigation, the complainant manifested his desistance. The respondent sheriff admitted he failed to turn over the remaining P3,740.00, which was the difference between the P20,000.00 withheld and the P16,260.00 reported expenses.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Sheriff Antonio Roque, Jr. is administratively liable for his handling of the execution and the monetary award.

RULING

Yes, the respondent is guilty of grave misconduct. The Supreme Court found that the sheriff violated the mandatory procedure for sheriff’s expenses under Rule 141, Section 9 of the Rules of Court. The rule requires the sheriff to: (1) make an estimate of expenses; (2) obtain court approval; (3) have the interested party deposit the approved amount with the Clerk of Court; (4) receive the disbursement from the Clerk of Court; and (5) liquidate the expenses with supporting receipts. The respondent bypassed this entire process. He directly obtained and retained a portion of the judgment award without prior estimation, court approval, or proper liquidation. His admission that he failed to account for and return P3,740.00 constitutes a clear misappropriation of funds.
The Court emphasized that the desistance of the complainant does not bar administrative action. Administrative cases involve the court’s integrity and are pursued for the public interest, not merely to address private grievances. The judiciary must maintain strict discipline among its personnel to preserve public confidence. Sheriffs, as crucial agents in the execution of court orders, must adhere to the highest standards of integrity and procedural rigor. Their failure to follow prescribed rules, especially concerning monetary collections, undermines the administration of justice.
Accordingly, the Court modified the Office of the Court Administrator’s recommendation. Respondent Antonio Roque, Jr. was found GUILTY of GRAVE MISCONDUCT. He was SUSPENDED for three (3) months without pay and ordered to immediately turn over the unaccounted P3,740.00 to the complainant. A stern warning was issued against repeating similar acts.