Case Digest: Panaguiton vs. DOJ, et al., G.R. No. 167571, November 25, 2008.
Criminal Law | Prescription
In 1992, Rodrigo Cawili borrowed ₱1.9M from petitioner Luis Panaguiton.
On January 8, 1993, Cawili and Ramon Tongson issued three checks as payment.
On March 18, 1993, the checks were dishonored.
In 1995, Panaguiton made demands, but payment was not made.
On August 24, 1995, Panaguiton filed a complaint for violation of B.P. 22 against Cawili and Tongson before the QC Prosecutor.
The case against Tongson was dismissed, then reinstated on appeal, then again dismissed by the prosecutor for having prescribed.
Whether the filing of a complaint for violation of B.P. 22 before the prosecutor’s office interrupt the running of the 4-year prescriptive period under Act No. 3326. (YES)
The filing of the complaint with the prosecutor’s office interrupts the prescriptive period.
DOJ wrongly relied on Zaldivia v. Reyes (ordinance violation) which held that prescription is tolled only upon filing of the information in court.
Correct precedent is Ingco v. Sandiganbayan (special law, R.A. 3019) which ruled that filing of a complaint with the prosecutor for preliminary investigation suspends prescription.
Applying Zaldivia would be unjust, as delays here were beyond petitioner’s control.
B.P. 22 is a special law; thus, Act No. 3326 applies.
Violation of B.P. 22 → prescribes in 4 years (since penalty is 30 days–1 year or fine).
Sec. 2: Prescription interrupted when proceedings are instituted, and resumes if dismissed without jeopardy.
However, “proceedings” in Sec. 2 of Act No. 3326 must be understood in light of current practice: preliminary investigation is now conducted by prosecutors (executive branch), not justices of the peace (judiciary).
Filing with the prosecutor is the first step in prosecution, hence sufficient to toll prescription.
To rule otherwise would unjustly penalize complainants for delays beyond their control.
Thus, since Panaguiton filed his complaint in 1995, well within 4 years from the dishonor of the checks (1993), the offense had not prescribed.
Petition GRANTED.
DOJ ordered to refile informations against Tongson for B.P. 22 violation.