G.R. No. RTJ-14-2376 & RTJ-14-2377. March 5, 2014.
MA. LIZA M. JORDA, City Prosecutor’s Office, Tacloban City, Complainant, vs. JUDGE CRISOLOGO S. BITAS, Regional Trial Court, Branch 7, Tacloban City, Respondent.

PROSECUTOR LEO C. TABAO, Complainant, vs. JUDGE CRISOLOGO S. BITAS, Regional Trial Court, Branch 7, Tacloban City, Respondent.

FACTS

Two consolidated administrative complaints were filed against Judge Crisologo S. Bitas. The first, by Prosecutor Leo C. Tabao, stemmed from the judge’s handling of Criminal Case Nos. 2009-11-537, 538, and 539 for Qualified Trafficking and violation of RA 7610 against Danilo Miralles. The judge did not issue a warrant of arrest against Miralles despite the non-bailable nature of the charges. After a hearing for judicial determination of probable cause, the judge found probable cause for trial but, without a petition for bail, ordered Miralles to post a reduced bail of ₱40,000 per case. The judge reasoned that the evidence was weak, the court had acquired jurisdiction over Miralles as he was present at hearings, and a warrant had become unnecessary after bail was posted.
The second complaint, by Prosecutor Ma. Liza M. Jorda, arose from the same cases. She alleged the judge exhibited bias through his questioning of a minor witness, which seemed to mitigate Miralles’s role. After Jorda filed a motion for his inhibition, the judge, in open court, made hostile statements such as “I don’t want to see your face!” and accused her of being influenced by politicians. He also prevented her from cross-examining a witness. Jorda presented a joint affidavit from social workers corroborating the judge’s statements. The judge denied the allegations, claimed Jorda was incompetent, and stated he caused her transfer to another court.

ISSUE

Whether Judge Crisologo S. Bitas is administratively liable for Grave Abuse of Authority, Irregularity in the Performance of Official Duties, Bias and Partiality.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court found Judge Bitas administratively liable. The Court ruled that the judge committed a serious irregularity by granting bail without a formal application and without conducting a hearing to determine whether the evidence of guilt was strong, which is mandatory for non-bailable offenses like Qualified Trafficking. His failure to issue a warrant of arrest was a disregard of procedural rules. Furthermore, his discourteous and insulting language toward Prosecutor Jorda in open court, corroborated by witnesses, constituted gross misconduct and violated the Code of Judicial Conduct. His actions demonstrated bias and partiality. Considering his length of service, the Court suspended him for THREE (3) MONTHS and ONE (1) DAY without pay, with a warning that repetition would warrant a more severe penalty.