Case Digest (G.R. No. L-12247)
Facts:
- The case "Vda. Bagatua v. Revilla" involves Beatriz Ramos Vda. Bagatua and her children (Rodrigo, Paz, Lydia, and Basilia Bagatua) as petitioners-appellants.
- Respondents-appellees are Pedro A. Revilla and Leonidas S. Lombos, the City Attorney and Assistant City Attorney of Quezon City, respectively.
- The dispute concerns Lot No. 569 of the Piedad Estate, originally registered to Alipio Bagatua under Transfer Certificate of Title No. 21411.
- After Alipio Bagatua's death, his widow and children executed a "Settlement of Estate and Donation of Real Property" on June 2, 1953, donating the property to the children.
- The Bagatuas obtained a new certificate of title in their names (T.C.T. No. 21995) and decided to subdivide the lot, hiring real estate broker Burgos L. Pangilinan.
- On June 29, 1954, the Bagatuas sold part of the lot to Pangilinan for P6,000.
- On June 21, 1956, Rodrigo Bagatua accused Pangilinan of estafa, alleging that Pangilinan induced them to sign papers under false pretenses, causing a financial loss of P13,432.
- The Assistant City Attorney conducted a preliminary investigation and recommended dismissing the complaint for lack of merit, which the City Attorney upheld.
- The Bagatuas filed a petition for mandamus with the Court of First Instance of Quezon City to compel the City Attorney to file an information against Pangilinan.
- The lower court dismissed the petition, leading to this appeal.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- The Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of the petition for mandamus.
- The Court ruled that there was no grave abuse of discretion by the City Attorney and Assistant City Attor...(Unlock)
Ratio:
- The duty of the fiscal or City Attorney to prosecute involves discretion and cannot be controlled by mandamus unless there has been a grave abuse of discretion.
- The prosecuting officer is bound by his oath to protect innocent persons from groundless, false, or malicious prosecution.
- The fiscal or City Attorney has the authority to dismiss a complaint if the evidence is insufficient to establish a prima facie case.
- This discretion is necessary to prevent the courts from being flooded with cases of d...continue reading
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-12247)
Facts:
The case of "Vda. Bagatua v. Revilla" involves Beatriz Ramos Vda. Bagatua and her children, Rodrigo, Paz, Lydia, and Basilia Bagatua, who were the petitioners-appellants, against Pedro A. Revilla and Leonidas S. Lombos, the City Attorney and Assistant City Attorney of Quezon City, respectively, who were the respondents-appellees. The case concerns Lot No. 569 of the Piedad Estate, originally registered in the name of Alipio Bagatua and covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 21411. After Alipio Bagatua's death, his widow, Beatriz Ramos, and their children executed a "Settlement of Estate and Donation of Real Property" on June 2, 1953, donating the property to the children. Subsequently, the Bagatuas secured a certificate of title in their names (T.C.T. No. 21995) and decided to subdivide the lot, engaging the services of real estate broker Burgos L. Pangilinan. On June 29, 1954, the Bagatuas sold a part of the lot to Pangilinan for P6,000. However, on June 21, 1956, Rodrigo Bagatua accused Pangilinan of estafa, alleging that Pangilinan induced them to sign papers under false pretenses, causing them a financial loss of P13,432. The Assistant City Attorney conducted a preliminary investigation and recommended the dismissal of the complaint for lack of merit, which the City Attor...