GR 44922; (March, 1936) (Digest)
G.R. No. 44922 ; March 31, 1936
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, through the complainant and offended party J. S. RUSTIA, petitioner, vs. BUENAVENTURA OCAMPO, accused, and C. M. VILLA-REAL and SOTERO RODAS, Judges of the Court of First Instance of Bulacan, respondents.
FACTS
The offended party, J.S. Rustia, filed a sworn criminal complaint for dereliction of duty (prevaricacion) against Buenaventura Ocampo in the Court of First Instance of Bulacan. The respondent judge, acting as investigator under Section 13 of General Orders No. 58, conducted a preliminary examination of the complainant and his witnesses. After the examination, the judge issued a resolution denying the issuance of a warrant of arrest and dismissing the complaint. Rustia excepted to the resolution and filed an application for an appeal, which the judge denied. Rustia then filed a petition for mandamus to compel the judges to forward the record on appeal and to have the orders denying his appeal annulled.
ISSUE
Whether an appeal lies from a resolution of a judge of a Court of First Instance denying the issuance of a warrant of arrest and dismissing the complaint after a preliminary examination under Section 13 of General Orders No. 58.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court denied the petition for mandamus and dismissed the case. The Court held that Section 13 of General Orders No. 58, which governs the preliminary examination before issuing a warrant of arrest, does not provide for an appeal from an order denying the issuance of such warrant. While Section 14 of the same law provides an appeal from a justice of the peace’s resolution ordering the release of an accused after a preliminary investigation, no similar right of appeal is granted from a resolution of a Court of First Instance. The right to appeal is statutory and not inherent; therefore, since no law provides for an appeal from such a resolution of a Court of First Instance, the appeal does not lie.
AI Generated by Armztrong.