G.R. No. L-18766 - People vs. LOPEZ

On December 21, 1960 at 10:00 A.M., the Chief of Police of Bacuag, Surigao del Norte apprehended three suspicious strangers loitering in Pagao, a sitio of Bacuag.
A bag carried by the three was seized; its contents included three carbines (.30 M1), one revolver (.22), three flashlights with batteries, two fully loaded carbine magazines, twelve rounds of carbine ammunition, one balisong, a screw driver, seven false keys (one described as a master key or picklock), trousers, shirts, and a pair of shoes.

The three occupants of the bag were identified as Ramon Lopez, Manuel Buico, and Arturo Caniete. They were charged in the Justice of the Peace Court of Bacuag with illegal possession of firearms and, in a separate complaint, illegal possession of false keys.
All three pleaded guilty to illegal possession of firearms and were convicted on December 24, 1960 by the Justice of the Peace Court (Criminal Case No. 374), each sentenced to three years imprisonment and fined P2,000.00.
The record on the false keys complaint was transmitted to the Court of First Instance of Surigao del Norte, and an information was filed against the three, alleging illegal possession of seven false keys, one of which was a picklock or master key, and charging that possession was "without lawful cause." The information also alleged the aggravating circumstance that the accused had been previously punished for an offense with an equal or greater penalty (the firearms conviction).

Of the three accused, Buico and Caniete pleaded guilty to the false keys charge; Lopez pleaded not guilty and stood trial.
After the prosecution presented one witness, Lopez moved to dismiss the information on the ground that the facts charged did not constitute an offense. The defense argued that an essential element of Article 304 (possession of picklocks or similar tools specially adapted to commission of robbery) was not alleged in the information — namely, that the picklock or false keys were "specially adapted to the commission of the crime of robbery."
The trial court sustained the motion and dismissed (quashed) the information for insufficiency. The prosecution appealed to the Supreme Court.

Whether the information as framed (alleging possession of seven false keys, one of which is a picklock or master key, "without lawful cause") sufficiently alleges all essential elements of the offense under Article 304 of the Revised Penal Code.

Whether it is necessary, for the sufficiency of an information, to state expressly that the picklocks or similar tools in the accused's possession were "specially adapted to the commission of the crime of robbery," or whether the allegation of possession of a picklock/false keys suffices.