G.R. No. 96229 - People vs. Navarro

On February 20, 1990, T/Sgt. Jose V. Sanchez, PC, investigator of the 244th PC Company in Concepcion Grande, Naga City, filed a complaint for qualified theft directly with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Naga City against minor Carlos Barbosa.
The Public Attorney’s Office, representing Carlos Barbosa, filed a Motion to Quash the Complaint on the ground that Sgt. Sanchez was not authorized to file a complaint in Court.
Presiding Judge Gregorio Manio, Jr. (Branch 19, RTC) remanded the case for a preliminary investigation and assigned the task to Prosecutor Salvador Cajot.

Before Prosecutor Cajot could conduct the preliminary investigation, Sgt. Sanchez filed a motion to withdraw the complaint with the Prosecution Office.
Acting on the motion to withdraw, Prosecutor Cajot issued an Order dated March 21, 1990 – approved by the Provincial Prosecutor – granting the motion and ordering the release of the accused.
A copy of Prosecutor Cajot’s Order was furnished to the RTC.

On June 6, 1990, Judge Gloriosa S. Navarro directed the Provincial Prosecutor and Prosecutor Cajot to explain why they encroached on the court’s jurisdiction over the case.
On June 7, 1990, the Provincial Prosecutor filed his explanation regarding the matter.
On June 13, 1990, Prosecutor Cajot filed his explanation, asserting that the prosecution’s office was the proper entity for conducting the preliminary investigation and that the court had divested itself of control by remanding the case to the Prosecution Office.

On June 18, 1990, Judge Navarro issued an Order setting aside Prosecutor Cajot’s earlier Order and directing Assistant Prosecutor Novelita Llaguno (who was present in her sala) to conduct the required preliminary investigation.
On June 29, 1990, Assistant Prosecutor Llaguno filed a motion for reconsideration, arguing that any resolution she might reach could conflict with the orders of her superiors and cause administrative chaos.
On July 4, 1990, Prosecutor Cajot also filed a motion for reconsideration, asserting that:

He did not dismiss the case but only granted the withdrawal of the complaint;
The power to conduct a preliminary investigation, including the dismissal of the complaint, was solely within the prosecutor’s discretion; and
The court, by remanding the case, had effectively divested itself of jurisdiction over it.

On July 6, 1990, Judge Navarro denied both motions for reconsideration and reiterated her June 18 Order, giving Assistant Prosecutor Llaguno 15 days from receipt of the Order to conduct the preliminary investigation.
On July 13, 1990, the Provincial Prosecutor filed a motion to set aside Judge Navarro’s orders, arguing that she lacked the authority to designate a particular prosecutor to handle the investigation, citing Abugotal vs. Tiro, and contending that the court’s action constituted a grave abuse of discretion.
A supplemental motion to withdraw the case was filed on July 24, 1990.
On August 28, 1990, Judge Navarro denied both the motion to set aside the orders and the supplemental motion, reasoning that:

The precedent in Abugotal vs. Tiro was applicable only to reinvestigation cases, not to a preliminary investigation; and
Allowing a change in the prosecutorial order might lead to further administrative disarray.

On September 4, 1990, the Provincial Prosecutor filed another motion for reconsideration, which was subsequently denied on September 6, 1990 due to lack of merit.

On April 16, 1991, the People of the Philippines, represented by the Solicitor General, filed the petition for certiorari seeking annulment of Judge Navarro’s impugned orders.
On May 27, 1991, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition for being filed out of time and for failing to state material dates as required.
On May 17, 1993, the Supreme Court reconsidered its earlier resolution and reinstated the petition for certiorari.

Whether a Regional Trial Court judge, when remanding a case to the provincial prosecutor, may designate a particular assistant prosecutor to conduct the preliminary investigation.
Whether the designation of Assistant Prosecutor Novelita Llaguno by Judge Navarro interfered with the executive function inherent in the conduct of a preliminary investigation, thereby usurping the exclusive role of the prosecution under established jurisprudence.