GR 165711; (June, 2006) (Digest)
G.R. No. 165711 June 30, 2006
HERMOSO ARRIOLA and MELCHOR RADAN, Petitioners, vs. SANDIGANBAYAN, Respondent.
FACTS
Petitioners Hermoso Arriola, the Barangay Captain, and Melchor Radan, the Barangay Chief Tanod, of Dulangan, Magdiwang, Romblon, were convicted by the Regional Trial Court for Malversation of Public Property thru Negligence under Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code. The charge stemmed from the loss of 44 pieces of confiscated lumber, valued at P17,611.20, which were officially received by Arriola and stored at Radan’s backyard. After DENR personnel discovered the lumber missing, petitioners produced different pieces of lumber, claiming they had recovered the missing items. The trial court found Arriola guilty as principal and Radan as an accessory.
The petitioners appealed to the Court of Appeals, which referred the case to the Sandiganbayan upon finding it had jurisdiction. The Sandiganbayan, however, dismissed the appeal outright because the petitioners failed to correctly designate the Sandiganbayan as the appellate court within the reglementary period, citing procedural rules. Their motion for reconsideration was denied, prompting this petition for certiorari alleging grave abuse of discretion by the Sandiganbayan in dismissing their appeal on purely technical grounds.
ISSUE
Did the Sandiganbayan commit grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the petitioners’ appeal on a technicality, and are the petitioners guilty of the crime charged?
RULING
The Supreme Court ruled that the Sandiganbayan committed grave abuse of discretion. While the petitioners initially erred in filing their appeal with the Court of Appeals, the subsequent referral by the CA to the Sandiganbayan cured this procedural defect. The Court emphasized that rules of procedure should not be applied rigidly to defeat substantial justice, especially in criminal cases where liberty is at stake. The Sandiganbayan’s outright dismissal, despite having acquired jurisdiction via referral, was a capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment.
On the merits, the Court affirmed Arriola’s conviction but acquitted Radan. Arriola, as Barangay Captain, was a public officer accountable for the confiscated lumber by reason of his official duties. His failure to account for the property, coupled with his attempt to substitute different lumber, constituted negligence and abandonment under Article 217. The penalty was affirmed with the modification deleting the award for consequential damages for lack of legal basis. For Radan, the evidence was insufficient to prove his liability as an accessory. Mere storage of the lumber at his property, without proof of conspiracy or deliberate permission for its taking, did not establish criminal liability beyond reasonable doubt.