G.R. No. 1007, May 16, 1903
PAULINO REYES, petitioner, vs. HON. FELIX M. ROXAS, Judge of First Instance of Rizal, respondent.

FACTS:
Petitioners, inhabitants of the Municipality of Pasig, initiated a criminal complaint for embezzlement of public funds against the municipal president. The judge of the Court of First Instance, after a preliminary investigation, issued an order dismissing the complaint. The petitioners filed a recurso de queja (petition for review) challenging the order of dismissal.

ISSUE:
Whether the petitioners, as private individuals and mere inhabitants of the municipality, have the legal right to institute and maintain a criminal action for the embezzlement of municipal funds, and consequently, the right to appeal the order dismissing their complaint.

RULING:
No. The Supreme Court denied the petition. Applying the doctrine established in United States vs. The Municipality of Santa Cruz de Malabon, and pursuant to Section 107 of General Orders, No. 58 (the then governing procedural rules), only the “person injured” by the offense may maintain a criminal action. The Court held that the petitioners were not the “persons injured” by the alleged embezzlement. The municipal funds were not their private property; the entity directly offended was the Municipality of Pasig itself. Since the petitioners lacked the substantive right to institute the criminal action, they also had no consequential right to appeal the order of dismissal. The denial was based on this legal principle, and not on the grounds cited by the lower court.