Case Digest: People vs. Bautista, GR. No. 168641, April 27, 2007

Criminal Law | Prescription


  • On June 12, 1999, Clemente Bautista allegedly committed slight physical injuries against Felipe Goyena Jr.

  • The complaint was filed with the barangay, but no settlement was reached. 

  • On August 11, 1999, a certification to file action was issued.

  • On August 16, 1999, the complainant filed a case with the Office of the City Prosecutor (OCP).

  • On November 8, 1999, the prosecutor recommended filing an information.

  • On June 20, 2000, the actual filing in court occurred.

  • Bautista moved to dismiss the case, arguing that the 60-day prescriptive period for slight physical injuries had lapsed.

  • MeTC: Denied motion to dismiss (case not yet prescribed).

  • RTC: Affirmed MeTC.

  • CA: Reversed RTC, dismissed case, held that prescription resumed upon prosecutor’s approval, and since the filing was delayed until June 2000, offense had prescribed.

  • Whether the prescriptive period for slight physical injuries resume after the prosecutor’s recommendation to file an information is approved, but before the information is actually filed in court. (NO.)

  • Filing of a complaint with the prosecutor’s office interrupts the prescriptive period (Art. 91, RPC).

    • Prescription resumes only if proceedings terminate without conviction or acquittal, or are unjustifiably stopped for reasons not imputable to the accused.

    • Approval of prosecutor’s recommendation does not terminate proceedings; hence, the prescriptive period remained tolled until filing in court.

    • Delay of the prosecutor in filing the Information cannot prejudice the State or the offended party.

    • Accused’s right to speedy trial not violated, since delay happened before trial.

  • Petition granted, CA Decision reversed, RTC ruling reinstated. 

  • Copy furnished to DOJ for possible administrative action against negligent prosecutors.



Article 91 of the Revised Penal Code provides thus:


Art. 91. Computation of prescription of offenses. - The period of prescription shall commence to run from the day on which the crime is discovered by the offended party, the authorities, or their agents, and shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information, and shall commence to run again when such proceedings terminate without the accused being convicted or acquitted, or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable to him.


The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the Philipppine Archipelago. (Emphasis supplied)


The CA and respondent are of the view that upon approval of the investigating prosecutor's recommendation for the filing of an information against respondent, the period of prescription began to run again. The Court does not agree. It is a well-settled rule that the filing of the complaint with the fiscal’s office suspends the running of the prescriptive period.


The proceedings against respondent was not terminated upon the City Prosecutor's approval of the investigating prosecutor's recommendation that an information be filed with the court. The prescriptive period remains tolled from the time the complaint was filed with the Office of the Prosecutor until such time that respondent is either convicted or acquitted by the proper court.


The Office of the Prosecutor miserably incurred some delay in filing the information but such mistake or negligence should not unduly prejudice the interests of the State and the offended party. As held in People v. Olarte, it is unjust to deprive the injured party of the right to obtain vindication on account of delays that are not under his control. All that the victim of the offense may do on his part to initiate the prosecution is to file the requisite complaint.


The constitutional right of the accused to a speedy trial cannot be invoked by the petitioner in the present petition considering that the delay occurred not in the conduct of preliminary investigation or trial in court but in the filing of the Information after the City Prosecutor had approved the recommendation of the investigating prosecutor to file the information.


The Office of the Solicitor General does not offer any explanation as to the delay in the filing of the information. The Court will not be made as an unwitting tool in the deprivation of the right of the offended party to vindicate a wrong purportedly inflicted on him by the mere expediency of a prosecutor not filing the proper information in due time.


The Court will not tolerate the prosecutors’ apparent lack of a sense of urgency in fulfilling their mandate. Under the circumstances, the more appropriate course of action should be the filing of an administrative disciplinary action against the erring public officials.

Popular posts from this blog

Equality and Human Rights: The United Nations and Human Rights System (September 16, 2023)

Sovereign Equality of States/Principle of sovereign equality UN Charter of 1945 All states are equal before international law no matter the size of their territory, population, economy or military. All states have equal rights and duties under international law, and that no state has the right to interfere in the internal affairs of another state. Positive Consequences: All states have a voice in international affairs .   All states have the opportunity to participate in international organizations and to negotiate and conclude treaties. This helps to ensure that the interests of all states are represented in the development of international law and policy. No state has the right to interfere in the internal affairs of another state.  This helps to protect the sovereignty of all states and to prevent the use of force or coercion to achieve political objectives. States have the right to develop their own political, economic, and social systems without interference from othe...
Read more

Election Laws: Requirements Before Election

REQUIREMENTS BEFORE ELECTION A. Registration Registration of Voters The right of a citizen to vote is necessarily conditioned upon certain procedural requirements he must undergo, among others, the process of registration. Registration regulates the exercise of the right of suffrage .  It is not a qualification for such right.  R.A. No. 8189, the Voter's Registration Act of 1996 (approved June 11, 1996) : Sec. 2. Declaration of Policy. It is the policy of the State to systematize the present method of registration in order to establish a clean, complete, permanent and updated list of voters. Sec. 3. Definition of Terms. – As used in this Act: Registration refers to the act of accomplishing and filing of a sworn application for registration by a qualified voter before the election officer of the city or municipality wherein he resides and including the same in the book of registered voters upon approval by the Election Registration Board; Registration Record refers to an ...
Read more

Special Rules and Proceedings: Rule 75

Special Rules and Proceedings RULE 75 Production of Will; Allowance of Will Necessary Section 1. Allowance necessary. Conclusive as to execution. — No will shall pass either real or personal estate  unless it is proved and allowed in the proper court.  Subject to the right of appeal,  such allowance of the will shall be conclusive as to its due execution. Probate  A special proceeding to establish the validity of a will. Kinds of wills A will has been defined as a species of conveyance whereby a person is permitted, with the formalities prescribed by law, to control to a certain degree thze disposition of his estate after his death.   Under the Civil Code, there are two kinds of wills which a testator may execute.  The first is the notarial will , which must be acknowledged before a notary public by a testator and the attesting witness and is governed by Articles 804 to 809 of the Civil Code. The second is the holographic will , which Article 810 ...
Read more