Title
Purugga vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 251778
Decision Date
Feb 22, 2023
LRA examiner Giovanni Purugganan convicted of Direct Bribery for accepting P50,000 to expedite a land titling process; Supreme Court affirmed conviction, modified penalty.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 191479)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Antecedents
    • On August 24, 2011, the Office of the Ombudsman found probable cause to charge petitioner Giovanni S. Purugganan, then an Examiner at the Land Registration Authority (LRA), with:
      • Direct bribery under Article 210 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended (demand/receipt of P50,000 to expedite titling); and
      • Violation of Section 3(b) of Republic Act No. 3019 (same facts, P300,000 demand).
    • Informations were filed before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City:
      • Criminal Case No. Q-11-171918 for direct bribery; and
      • Criminal Case No. Q-11-171919 for RA 3019, Sec. 3(b).
  • Trial proceedings
    • Prosecution witnesses:
      • Albert R. Avecilla (private complainant);
      • NBI Agent Normando Anire;
      • LRA Director Porfirio Encisa, Jr.
    • Defense witness: petitioner himself.
    • Prosecution’s version:
      • Private complainant sought to expedite his uncle’s titling, was told by petitioner it would cost P300,000;
      • Complainant coordinated with the NBI for an entrapment; on August 23, 2011 at Jollibee, he handed a marked P50,000 envelope to petitioner who inspected it; petitioner was then arrested.
      • Forensic test on petitioner’s hands for fluorescent powder was negative; only the bills, not the envelope, were dusted.
    • Defense’s version:
      • Petitioner acted only as examiner, advised complainant on discrepancies and procedure;
      • On August 23, 2011, he merely presumed the envelope contained money; he denied touching or demanding it;
      • He was detained by the NBI for three days and later released; a prior administrative complaint was dismissed for lack of evidence.
  • Lower court rulings and appeals
    • RTC Branch 88 Joint Decision (February 8, 2017): convicted petitioner of both direct bribery and RA 3019 Sec. 3(b), sentencing him to indeterminate terms (2y4m–3y6m20d for bribery; 6y1m–8y for RA 3019) and fines.
    • Sandiganbayan, Third Division Decision (November 6, 2019):
      • Affirmed conviction for direct bribery (Crim. Case No. Q-11-171918);
      • Reversed conviction for RA 3019 Sec. 3(b) (Crim. Case No. Q-11-171919) for failure to prove an indispensable element; petitioner acquitted of the latter.
    • Sandiganbayan Resolution (February 10, 2020): denied petitioner’s motion for partial reconsideration.

Issues:

  • Whether petitioner’s guilt for Direct Bribery (Criminal Case No. Q-11-171918) was proven beyond reasonable doubt.
    • Whether the prosecution established the elements of direct bribery (public office, demand/receipt of gift, connection to duties, corrupt intent).
    • Whether alleged inconsistencies (lost text messages, negative fluorescent test) and administrative exoneration undermine the prosecution’s case.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.