AM P 292; (November, 1982) (Digest)
G.R. No. P-292 November 25, 1982
ATTY. ISIDRO G. ARENAS, complainant vs. MANUEL RESULTAN, SR., Clerk of Court, City Court, San Carlos City, respondent.
FACTS
Atty. Isidro G. Arenas filed an administrative complaint against Clerk of Court Manuel Resultan, Sr., alleging infidelity in the custody of a public record and discourtesy/inefficiency. The first charge stemmed from Resultan’s inability to locate the records of a specific criminal case despite repeated demands. The second charge involved an alleged arrogant and disrespectful attitude from Resultan when Arenas inquired about bail matters.
Respondent Resultan countered that the record was already missing before the incident and that he had exerted exhaustive efforts to locate it. He also claimed that the complainant, who appeared to be under the influence of liquor, was the aggressor in a physical altercation. Resultan stated he had reconstructed the missing record, allowing the trial to proceed, resulting in the accused’s conviction and service of sentence. The City Fiscal had previously exonerated him from a related criminal charge.
ISSUE
Whether respondent Clerk of Court should be held administratively liable for the loss of court records and for alleged discourtesy.
RULING
The Court dismissed the administrative complaint but admonished the respondent. The legal logic rests on the absence of proof of bad faith or illicit purpose. The investigating judge found that Resultan made painstaking efforts to locate the missing record and promptly reconstructed it, causing no damage or prejudice to the parties, as the case was tried and concluded. The complainant’s failure to appear at the formal investigation and desistance further weakened the charges. However, as a public officer, Resultan is bound to exercise the prudence and care of a careful man in managing his affairs. Thus, while not liable for the infidelity charge due to lack of evil motive and the demonstrated remedial actions, he was admonished to exercise greater vigilance in the custody of documents and supervision of subordinates to prevent future occurrences. The charge of discourtesy was not substantiated given the circumstances described in the record.