GR 35902; (October, 1931) (Digest)
G.R. No. 35902 ; October 28, 1931
EXEQUIEL KARE, petitioner, vs. SERVILIANO PLATON, Judge of First Instance of Albay, FRANCISCO PERFECTO, et al., respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Exequiel Kare filed an election protest contesting the election of respondent Francisco Perfecto as third member of the provincial board of Albay. The respondent judge issued an order requiring Kare to post two kinds of bond: a personal bond and a cash bond to be deposited with the provincial treasurer, initially set at P3,000 personal and P2,000 cash, later modified to P3,500 personal and P1,500 cash. The cash portion was intended to cover initial expenses such as transportation and allowances for officials and commissioners involved in the contest. Kare sought a writ of prohibition to prevent enforcement of this order, arguing that under Section 482 of the Election Law, the choice between giving a personal bond or making a cash deposit belongs solely to the contestant, not the court.
ISSUE
Whether the respondent judge acted in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion by requiring the petitioner to post both a personal bond and a cash deposit, instead of allowing the petitioner to choose between the two under Section 482 of the Election Law.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition. While Section 482 of the Election Law grants the contestant the right to choose between filing a personal bond or making a cash deposit in lieu thereof, the court retains discretionary power to require an advance cash deposit to cover initial and immediate expenses incidental to the election contest, such as costs for transporting ballot boxes and compensating officials. The respondent judge’s order, though not phrased with strict legal technicality, was interpreted as requiring a personal bond for the overall costs and a separate cash advance for upfront expenses. This did not constitute an excess of jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion, as the advance ensures prompt payment for necessary services without waiting for the contest’s final resolution. The writ of prohibition was therefore unwarranted.
AI Generated by Armztrong.