Facts:
Crescencio N. Bongalos (complainant) filed an administrative case for
gross neglect of duty against Jose R. Monungolh and Victoria D. Jamito, Clerk of Court II and Court Interpreter I, respectively, of the 14th Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Dauis-Panglao, Bohol. The private complainant was involved as complainant in Criminal Case No.
1844 for
attempted homicide and Criminal Case No.
1825 for
illegal possession of firearms, both filed against Francisco Micabani. The cases were heard and tried jointly by the same court, where respondents were assigned. When the prosecution was about to formally offer its evidence, the court discovered that
Exhibit “A”, a .38 caliber snub nose
paltik revolver with Serial No.
21760, and
Exhibits “A-1” to “A-5” consisting of five
live ammunitions, were
missing. The accused then filed a
demurrer to evidence, which the trial court granted, leading to an order of dismissal that became the subject of
certiorari proceedings; thereafter, Bongalos charged Monungolh and Jamito with gross neglect of duty in connection with the loss of the missing exhibits. Bongalos relied on a receipt signed by Monungolh indicating that Monungolh received the gun and ammunitions from the police at the commencement of the criminal cases. Monungolh defended that it was Jamito who was responsible because, as interpreter, she allegedly kept the exhibits during presentation and returned them to him. Jamito countered that her duties as court interpreter related to translation of testimonies and marking of exhibits, but not
safekeeping, which she maintained was the clerk of court’s function. She asserted that the police kept the exhibits in the usual practice due to the court’s lack of facilities for safekeeping such as safe or cabinet. In Monungolh’s comment, he explained that he requested SPO3 Jose Pabalan, Jr., the police officer assigned to the case, to secure the evidence because the trial court had no safe or cabinet. He added that the police officer did not sign any memorandum acknowledging receipt and alleged that the exhibits never came into his custody during the pendency of the case. He further argued that the transcript of stenographic notes showed that the private prosecutor knew the evidence was still in the custody of the PNP, and that the presiding judge remarked that the evidence should have been returned to Monungolh during the July 27, 1998 hearing when the gun and live ammunitions were marked as exhibits. The
OCA recommended dismissal as to Jamito, finding that safekeeping of exhibits was not part of an interpreter’s duties, but it recommended that Monungolh be fined
P5,000.00 and sternly warned because it was his duty to ensure safe keeping of documents and exhibits in the court’s custody. On January 17, 2001, the Court dismissed the case against Jamito for lack of merit and required the parties to manifest whether they were willing to submit the case for decision based on pleadings already filed; Monungolh manifested on March 5, 2001. After reviewing the records, the Court agreed with the OCA’s findings but
increased the fine due to the irreparable damage caused by Monungolh’s gross negligence.
Issues:
Whether
Clerk of Court II Jose R. Monungolh was
guilty of gross neglect of duty for the loss of the marked prosecution exhibits, warranting disciplinary sanction.
Ruling:
Ratio:
Doctrine: