Case Digest (G.R. No. 96025)
Facts:
Oscar P. Parungao, former municipal treasurer of Porac, Pampanga, was indicted for malversation of public funds under Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code for the alleged misappropriation of P185,250 CRBI funds received on September 29, 1980; he pleaded not guilty but admitted receipt of the funds. At trial he accounted for P126,095.59 for materials (vouchers 41-80-12-440 and 41-80-12-441) and P59,154.41 paid to municipal labor payrolls; the Sandiganbayan acquitted him of malversation but convicted him of illegal use of public funds under Article 220, denied reconsideration, and Parungao sought review.
Issues:
- Did the Sandiganbayan exceed its jurisdiction or otherwise err in convicting petitioner of illegal use of public funds after acquitting him of malversation of public funds?
- Did the Sandiganbayan err in not considering petitioner’s documentary proofs in his favor?
Ruling:
The Court GRANTED the petition, REVERSED the decision of the Sandiganbayan, and ACQUITTED the petitioner of illegal use of public funds. The Court held that the conviction for Article 220 could not properly be entered in the malversation case and that the Sandiganbayan should have followed Section 11, Rule 119 to commit the accused to answer for the proper offense and allow filing of a new information. The Court nevertheless addressed the merits and found no violation of Article 220, because the CRBI fund was a general fund and the disbursement served a public purpose and lacked a law or ordinance appropriating it specifically to the Barangay Jalung road.
Ratio:
The Court relied on the accused’s constitutional right under Article III, Section 14 [2], and the rule on variance in Section 4, Rule 120 and Section 5, Rule 120, concluding that malversation (Art. 217) and technical malversation (Art. 220) have distinct elements and neither includes the other; therefore conviction for Art. 220 could not be entered in an information charging Art. 217. Pursuant to Section 11, Rule 119, the proper procedure upon such a charging mistake was to commit the accused for the proper offense and dismiss the original case unless a new information was filed. On the merits, the Court held that the CRBI allocation was a general fund and the internal arrangement to apply it to the Barangay Jalung road was not an appropriation by law or ordinance, and the expenditures were for public labor wages, so Article 220 was not violated.
Doctrine:
- The accused must be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; an accused may be convicted only of the offense charged except as permitted by Section 4, Rule 120.
- (Get Pro to unlock 4 more doctrines)