Case Summary (G.R. No. L-12487)
Case Background and Initial Proceedings
On June 20, 1955, after a trial, Custodio was found guilty and sentenced to 20 days of arresto menor, ordered to pay P80.00 in indemnity, with an additional subsidiary imprisonment should he be unable to pay, along with court costs. Following his conviction, Custodio was committed to municipal jail on the same day. Within two days, he indicated his intention to appeal the conviction and was provisionally released after fulfilling the appeal bond requirement.
Legal Controversy over Order of Recommitment
On June 24, 1955, the complainant’s counsel filed a motion to lift Custodio’s order of release, arguing that he had already commenced serving his sentence. The Justice of the Peace agreed and on July 5, 1955, issued an order for Custodio’s recommitment. Before this order could be executed, Custodio filed a petition for certiorari with injunction against both the Justice of the Peace and the chief of police, contending that the recommitment order was beyond the jurisdiction of the Justice of the Peace.
Court of First Instance Proceedings
The Court of First Instance, upon reviewing the petition, saw prima facie merit and granted a preliminary injunction, issuing a writ on July 18, 1955, after Custodio posted a bond of P200.00. Subsequently, on August 5, 1955, the respondents responded to the petition, asserting that the recommitment was lawful since Custodio was already serving his sentence.
Amendments and Dismissal of the Petition
On September 17, 1956, the Court of First Instance ordered Custodio to add the complainants as parties-respondents in accordance with Section 5, Rule 67 of the Rules of Court. When Custodio submitted a manifestation suggesting that the original respondents were sufficient, the trial court dismissed the case on October 11, 1956, due to Custodio's failure to include the additional parties as directed.
Appellant’s Arguments and Legal Considerations
Custodio appealed the dismissal, arguing the unnecessary nature of including the complainants as respondents. He stated that the Justice of the Peace and the chief of police were the only necessary parties because they enacted the disputed order. Moreover, Custodio posited that the trial court should have allowed him an opportunity to amend his petition rather than dismiss it outright.
Court’s Rationale and Decision
The reviewing court concurred with Custodio's contention that the trial court had acted too harshly by dismissing the case
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. L-12487)
Case Overview
- Parties Involved:
- Petitioner/Appellant: Castor Custodio
- Respondents/Appellees: Judge Pedro T. Cristobal and others
- Court: Supreme Court of the Philippines
- Date of Decision: January 30, 1962
- Citation: 114 Phil. 22 [G.R. No. L-12487]
Procedural History
- Initial Accusation: Castor Custodio and three others were accused of malicious mischief by Ladislava Balgua in the Justice of the Peace Court of Mabini, Pangasinan.
- Trial Outcome: Following a trial, all accused were convicted. Custodio received a sentence of:
- 20 days of arresto menor
- Indemnity: P80.00 to the offended party
- Subsidiary imprisonment: in case of insolvency
- Costs: to be paid by Custodio
- Sentencing Date: June 20, 1955; Custodio was committed to municipal jail on the same date.
Appeal Attempt and Legal Maneuverings
- Notice of Appeal: On June 22, 1955, Custodio filed a notice of his intention to appeal and was ordered released provisionally upon posting an appeal bond.
- Motion to Lift Release: On June 24, 1955, the complainant's counsel motioned to lift Custodio's release due to his commencement of serving the sentence on June 20, 1955.
- Recommitment Order: The justice of the peace, upon finding merit in the motion, issued a recommitment order on July 5, 1955.
Petition for Certiorari
- Filing of Petition: In response to the recommitment order, Custodio filed a petition for certiorari with injunction against the justice of the peace and the chief of police, arguing that the order exceeded jurisdiction.
- Preliminary Injunction: The