G.R. No. 128253 September 22, 1998
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Daniel Bao-In y Ventura, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Daniel Bao-In y Ventura was convicted by the trial court for illegal possession of eight (8) kilograms of marijuana under R.A. 6425, as amended, and sentenced to reclusion perpetua and a fine. The prosecution evidence established that on November 14, 1995, CIS agents SPO3 Romeo Dulay and SPO2 Maximiano Peralta were at the Dagupan Bus Terminal in Baguio City on a gunrunning tip. They observed a commotion involving security guard Ricky Macadangdang and two individuals, accused Bao-In and a certain Mario. Security guard Macadangdang testified that Mario was carrying a black traveling bag and refused inspection before boarding a bus. When the CIS agents approached, Mario dropped the bag in front of the accused and fled. SPO3 Dulay chased but failed to catch Mario. The bag was inspected and found to contain eight bricks of marijuana. The accused denied ownership, claiming the bag belonged to Mario, whom he had met only a month prior and encountered by chance at the terminal. He stated he was at the bus door to see Mario off and had no bus ticket. SPO3 Dulay corroborated that Mario, not the accused, was holding the bag. SPO2 Peralta, however, testified that he saw the accused also holding the bag at one point. The accused maintained his innocence, and the Solicitor General, on appeal, recommended acquittal.

ISSUE

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused for illegal possession of marijuana beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court REVERSED the trial court’s decision and ACQUITTED accused-appellant Daniel Bao-In y Ventura on the ground of reasonable doubt. The Court held that the prosecution evidence failed to establish moral certainty of guilt. The totality of evidence showed the black bag containing marijuana belonged to Mario, not the accused. SPO3 Dulay categorically stated he never saw the accused hold the bag, corroborated by security guard Macadangdang. There was no proof of conspiracy, as mere presence at the scene does not establish a prior agreement. The accused’s conduct—having no bus ticket, not fleeing, and not assisting Mario—supported his claim of innocence and lack of knowledge. The Court found SPO2 Peralta’s contradictory testimony on the accused holding the bag unreliable compared to the consistent accounts of other witnesses. The defense of denial, though simple, was credible and supported by the evidence. The accused’s unjust incarceration for nearly three years, during which his first-born child was young, underscored the grave consequence of an erroneous conviction. The Court emphasized the principle that it is better for ten guilty persons to escape than for one innocent to suffer.