FRANCO, MANUEL JOSEPH U.

JD 2B | Criminal Procedure

People vs. Magallanes

G.R. Nos. 118013-14
October 11, 1995

FACTS:
In the evening of August 7, 1992, the Spouses Dumancas, under the direction and
cooperation of P/Col. Nicolas Torres who took advantage of his position as station commander of
the PNP, with Police Inspector Abetos cooperation, induced other police officers, namely:
Canuday, Pahayupan, Lamis, civilian agents: Fernandez, Divinagracia, Delgado and Gargallano,
to abduct kidnap and detain, Rufino Gargar and Danilo Lumangyao, with the use of a motor
vehicle and then shot and killed the victims with evident premeditation, treachery and nocturnity.
The other accused secretly buried the victims in a makeshift shallow grave to conceal the crime
of murder for a fee of P500.00 each.
The cases were consolidated and the accused pleaded not guilty and filed motions for
bail. The prosecution presented Moises Grandeza, the alleged lone eyewitness and co-conspirator
in the offense. After the prosecution rested its case, the trial court received evidence for the
accused, but the reception of evidence was suspended because of the motions for inhibition of
judge Garvilles filed by several accused. Garvilles voluntarily inhibited himself and the case was
re-raffled. However, the prosecution moved for the transmittal of the recors to the
Sandiganbayan because the offenses charged were committed in relation to the office of the
accused PNP officers. The trial court ruled that the Sandiganbayan does not have jurisdiction
because the informations do not state that the offenses were committed in relation to the office of
the accused PNP officers and denied the Motion for the Transfer of Records to Sandiganbayan.
The prosecution moved to reconsider but the same was denied.
The reception of evidence was resumed but the judge later inhibited himself. The cases
were then re-raffled to Branch 49 of tne Regional Trial Court of Bacolod. The prosecution filed a
petition for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus with a prayer for a temporary restraining order,
challenging the refusal of the judge to transfer the cases to the Sandiganbayan. The private
respondents were required to comment on the petition and issued a temporary restraining order
enjoining the respondent judge to desist from proceeding with the trial of the case.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the offenses were committed in relation to the office of the accused PNP
officers.
HELD:
The jurisdiction of a court may be determined by the law in force at the time of the
commencement of the action. When the informations in the cases were filed, the law governing
the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan was P.D. 1861 , which provides that the Sandiganbayan
shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over cases involving: 1) violations of the Anti-Graft and
Corrupt Practices Act; 2) offenses committed by public officers in relation to their office, where
the penalty prescribed is higher than prision correccional or imprisonment of six (6) years, or a
fine of P 6,000.00.
If the penalty for the offense charged does not exceed imprisonment of six (6) years or a
fine of P6,000.00, it shall be tried by the Regional Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court,
Municipal Trial Court or the Municipal Circuit Trial Court.
Jurisdiction is also determined by the allegations in the complaint or information and not
by the result of the evidence after the trial. In the present case, the Sandiganbayan has not yet
acquired jurisdiction over the cases. The allegations in the complaint or information of taking
advantage of his position is not sufficient to bring the offenses within the definition of offenses
committed in relation to public office. It is considered merely as an aggravating circumstance.
Moreover, the Sandiganbayan has partly lost its jurisdiction over cases involving
violations of R.A. 3019, as amended in R.A. 1379 because it only retains jurisdiction on cases
enumerated in subsection (a) when the public officers rank is classified as Grade 27 or higher.
In the case at bar, none of the PNP officers involved occupy a position classified as Grade 27
or higher. Accused Torres, who is highest in rank among the accused, only has a rank classified
as Grade 18.
Lastly, the courts cannot be divested of jurisdiction which was already acquired before
the subsequent enactment of R.A. 7975 which limited the Sandiganbayans jurisdiction to
officers whose rank is Grade 27 or higher, be4cause the courts retain its jurisdiction until the
end of litigation. Hence, cases already under the jurisdiction of the courts at the time of the
enactment of R.A. 7975 are only referred to the proper courts if trial has not yet begun at that
time. Petition is DENIED and the challenged orders are AFFIRMED.