Case Summary (G.R. No. 172131)
Key Dates
- October–November 1996: Issuance of three corporate checks totaling ₱1,500,000 and two additional BDO checks (Nos. 0000157580 for ₱12,270 and 0000157581 for ₱29,300)
- December 17, 1996: Notice of Dishonor received by Saulo
- January–November 1997: Preliminary investigations and filing of rival criminal complaints
- April 27, 2015: MeTC, Branch 71, Pasig City Decision convicting Saulo
- July 13, 2015: MeTC Resolution denying reconsideration
- December 22, 2015: RTC, Branch 268, Pasig City Decision affirming MeTC
- September 26, 2016: RTC Order denying reconsideration
- May 23, 2018: CA Decision (CA-G.R. CR No. 39251) affirming RTC on perjury (B.P. 22 convictions not contested)
- October 19, 2018: CA Resolution denying reconsideration
- June 8, 2020: Supreme Court Decision
Applicable Law
- 1987 Philippine Constitution
- Rules of Court, Rule 45 (Petition for Review on Certiorari), Rule 110 (Complaint-Affidavit), Rule 112 (Preliminary Investigation)
- Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (Dishonored Checks)
- Revised Penal Code, Article 183 (Perjury)
Antecedent Facts
Saulo encountered financial difficulties in 1996 and sought loans through Alberto. Initial loans amounted to ₱1,500,000 evidenced by three corporate checks drawn against Khumbmela’s account. In October and November 1996, Saulo issued two additional BDO checks (Nos. 0000157580 and 0000157581) to repay smaller advances and to settle liabilities with Masinag Lumber. Both checks were dishonored for “Account Closed” and “Insufficient Funds.”
Prosecution’s Version
Alberto issued a December 17, 1996 Notice of Dishonor upon which Saulo filed estafa, qualified theft, and falsification complaints against her—cases later dismissed for lack of evidence. In September and October 1997, Alberto counter-filed: (1) perjury in MeTC Criminal Case No. 31929, alleging Saulo falsely declared no business ties with her; and (2) two counts of violation of B.P. 22 in MeTC Criminal Cases Nos. 33348 and 33349, based on the bounced checks.
Defense’s Version
Saulo denied issuing the two BDO checks in question, denied any loan obligations to Alberto or Masinag Lumber, and maintained that Alberto misappropriated missing checks uncovered in a company audit. He asserted that the demand letter and subsequent complaint-affidavit were motivated by Alberto’s impending claims. He stipulated certain facts at preliminary conference but contested his knowledge and intent.
MeTC Findings
On April 27, 2015, the MeTC convicted Saulo of:
- Two counts of violation of B.P. 22 (Checks Nos. 157580 and 157581), imposing fines totaling ₱83,140 with subsidiary imprisonment and ordering payment of ₱41,570 plus 6% interest.
- Perjury for willfully asserting falsehoods in his complaint-affidavit, imposing an indeterminate sentence of three months and one day to one year and one day.
The court found all elements of B.P. 22 and perjury proven: Saulo issued and signed the dishonored checks, received notice of dishonor, and knowingly made material false statements under oath.
RTC Ruling
The Regional Trial Court, Branch 268, Pasig City, in Criminal Cases Nos. 157569–70 (B.P. 22) and 157571 (Perjury), affirmed the MeTC decision on December 22, 2015, and denied reconsideration on September 26, 2016. It upheld the finding that Saulo deliberately filed a false complaint to gain leverage against Alberto’s claims and that he failed to verify the checks’ status despite access to witness Leah Celso.
Court of Appeals Ruling
The CA affirmed Saulo’s perjury conviction on May 23, 2018, noting all elements were present and Saulo did not challenge his B.P. 22 convictions in his petition. It denied reconsideration on October 19, 2018.
Issues on Review
- Whether Saulo willfully and deliberately asserted falsehoods in his complaint-affidavit (perjury).
- Whether Saulo could be convicted for violation of B.P. 22 (dishonored checks).
Supreme Court Ruling on Perjury
Applying the 1987 Constitution and Rule 45’s limited review on questions of law, the Court held the CA correctly affirmed factual findings on credibility, motive, and the deliberate nature of Saulo’s false statements. The elements of perjury under RPC Article 183 were met:
- Material statements under oath in a required complaint-affidavit.
- Administration of oath by a competent officer.
- Willful and deliberate assertion of known falsehoods.
- Legal purpose (preliminary investigation).
Credible testimony and documentary evidence confirmed that Saulo borrowed fun
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 172131)
Procedural Background
- Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 by Edwin L. Saulo (G.R. No. 242900)
- Challenge to the Court of Appeals Decision (May 23, 2018) and Resolution (Oct 19, 2018) in CA-G.R. CR No. 39251
- CA had affirmed the RTC of Pasig City, Branch 268 Decision (Dec 22, 2015) and Order (Sept 26, 2016)
- Underlying MeTC Decision (Apr 27, 2015) and Resolution (July 13, 2015) convicting Saulo of two counts of Violation of B.P. 22 and of Perjury
Antecedent Facts (Prosecution Version)
- Saulo owned Yadoo Dynasty and Khumbmela Products, Inc., manufacturers of bags and accessories
- Alberto hired (1992–1996) as Disbursing Officer, later Operations Manager
- Saulo’s financial difficulty led him to borrow P1,500,000 via Alberto’s contacts; he issued three checks (P1.2M, P200K, P100K)
- October 1996: Saulo borrowed P12,270 from Alberto; issued BDO Check No. 157580
- November 1996: For studio construction, Saulo issued BDO Check No. 157581 for P29,300, drawn on Khumbmela’s account
- Both checks dishonored: reasons “Account Closed” and “Insufficient Funds”
- Alberto sent Notice of Dishonor (Dec 17, 1996); Saulo then filed and lost estafa, qualified theft, and falsification cases against her
Antecedent Facts (Defense Version)
- Saulo testified that Alberto, as Auditor/Finance Officer, handled receivables and payables
- Denied any loan obligation or issuance of Checks Nos. 157580 and 157581; no dealings with Masinag Lumber
- 1997 audit revealed missing checks, attributed to Alberto, who then stopped reporting for work
- On counsel’s advice, Khumbmela closed its bank accounts; Saulo received and answered Alberto’s demand letter (Dec 17, 1996)
- Saulo filed qualified theft case, reiterating his complaint-affidavit statements; pleaded not guilty at arraignment
Charges and Informations
- Perjury (MeTC CC No. 31929): Saulo sworn under oa