G.R. No. 227427 , June 6, 2018
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DELIA CALLEJO y TADEJA and SILVERA ANTOQUE y MOYA, Accused-Appellants.

FACTS

Accused-appellants Delia Callejo and Silvera Antoque were charged with illegal sale and illegal possession of dangerous drugs, respectively, under Republic Act No. 9165 (RA 9165). The charges stemmed from a buy-bust operation. The prosecution’s evidence detailed the seizure of drugs and the subsequent inventory conducted in the presence of an elected barangay official. However, representatives from the media and the Department of Justice (DOJ) were not present during this inventory.
The defense contested the validity of the seizure and custody of the drugs, arguing that the buy-bust team committed unexplained breaches of the chain of custody procedures mandated under Section 21 of RA 9165. Specifically, they highlighted the failure to comply with the witness requirement during the physical inventory and photographing of the seized items.

ISSUE

Whether the prosecution successfully established the corpus delicti of the crimes, given the alleged non-compliance with the chain of custody requirements under Section 21 of RA 9165.

RULING

The Court acquitted the accused-appellants. The prosecution failed to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to unjustified deviations from the chain of custody protocol. While the ponencia focused on the breaches and inconsistencies regarding the informant’s identity, the Separate Concurring Opinion by Justice Peralta elaborated on the implications of Section 21. The law, as amended by RA 10640, requires the presence of only two witnesses during inventory: an elected public official and either a representative from the National Prosecution Service or the media. The saving clause allows non-compliance under justifiable grounds, provided the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items are preserved.
Here, the prosecution offered no justifiable reason for the absence of the required witnesses. The elected official was summoned only after the arrest and seizure, and no media or DOJ representative was present. This failure to adhere to the procedure, without a valid explanation, created reasonable doubt about the integrity of the seized drugs. The identity and evidentiary value of the corpus delicti were therefore compromised. Consequently, the accused-appellants must be acquitted, as the indispensable requirement of proving an unbroken chain of custody was not met.