RULE 114

BAIL

SECTION 1. Bail defined. Bail is the security given for the release of a person in custody
of the law, furnished by him or a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before any court
as required under the conditions hereinafter specified. Bail may be given in the form of
corporate surety, property bond, cash deposit, or recognizance.

What is Bail?
Bail is the security given for the release of a person in custody of the law, furnished by him or a
bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before any court as required under the conditions
hereinafter specified. Bail may be given in the form of corporate surety, property bond, cash
deposit, or recognizance.
What is the primary purpose of bail?
The purpose of bail is (a) to combine the administration of criminal justice with the convenience
of a person accused but not yet proven guilty; (b) to relieve the accused of imprisonment, and
the State of burden of keeping him, pending trial.

WHEN IS THE RIGHT TO BAIL AVAILABLE?

>The right only accrues when a person is arrested or deprived of his liberty
>The right to bail presupposes that the accused is
under legal custody
> A court cannot order provisional liberty to one who is then actually in the enjoyment of
his liberty
> The right to bail therefore presupposes that the accused should be in custody

What do you mean by in custody of law?

In custody of law may mean:
1. Physical or actual custody; or
2. Constructive custody. (Panderanga vs. CA, 247 SCRA 41)
What are the types of bail?
There are four (4) types of bail under Section 1:
1. Corporate surety;
2. Property bond ;
3. Cash deposit; and
4. Recognizance.

SECTION. 2. Conditions of the bail; requirements. All kinds of bail are subject to the
following conditions: (a) The undertaking shall be effective upon approval, and unless
cancelled, shall remain in force at all stages of the case until promulgation of the judgment
of the Regional Trial Court, irrespective of whether the case was originally filed in or
appealed to it; (b) The accused shall appear before the proper court whenever required by
the court of these Rules; (c) The failure of the accused to appear at the trial without
justification and despite due notice shall be deemed a waiver of his right to be present
thereat. In such case, the trial may proceed in absentia; and (d) The bondsman shall

surrender the accused to the court for execution of the final judgment. The original papers
shall state the full name and address of the accused, the amount of the undertaking and
the conditions required by this section. Photographs (passport size) taken within the last
six (6) months showing the face, left and right profiles of the accused must be attached to
the bail.
All kinds of bail are subject to the following conditions:
(a) The undertaking shall be effective upon approval, and unless cancelled, shall remain in
force at all stages of the case until promulgation of the judgment of the Regional Trial
Court, irrespective of whether the case was originally filed in or appealed to it;
(b) The accused shall appear before the proper court whenever required by the court of these
Rules;
(c) The failure of the accused to appear at the trial without justification and despite due notice
shall be deemed a waiver of his right to be present thereat. In such case, the trial may
proceed in absentia; and
(d) The bondsman shall surrender the accused to the court for execution of the final
judgment.

What is TRIAL IN ABSENTIA?

TRIAL IN ABSENTIA is a stage in a criminal proceeding where the trial is being held even
without the physical presence of the accused. Trial in absentia is allowed in our jurisdiction and is
indeed authorized by the Constitution. Section 14 (2), Article III of the 1987 Constitution
provides:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is
proved, and shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel, to be informed of the
nature and cause of the accusation against him, to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial, to
meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to secure the attendance of
witnesses and the production of evidence in his behalf. However, after arraignment, trial
may proceed notwithstanding the absence of the accused: Provided, that he has been
duly notified and his failure to appear is unjustifiable.

Thus, before a trial in absentia may be had, the following requisites must be present:
1. That there has been an arraignment;
2. That the accused has been notified; and
3. That his failure to appear is unjustified.

In Estrada v. People (G.R. No. 162371, August 25, 2005), the Supreme Court affirmed the
conviction of the accused for the crime of estafa based only on prosecution evidence in view of
the unexplained failure of the accused to appear at several trial dates.
In this case, the accused argued, among others, that while her non-appearance in the trials may
be deemed to have waived her right to be present during the proceedings, such waiver does not
include a waiver of her right to present evidence. Her conviction by the trial court is in effect a
denial of her constitutional right to be heard and present evidence in her defense.
In denying the petition for certiorari of the petitioner (accused), the Supreme Court held that by
the mere fact that she jumped bail and could no longer be found, petitioner is considered to have
waived her right to be present at the trial, and she and her counsel were to be deemed to have
received notice. As held in the earlier cases, the Court ruled that once an accused escapes from
prison or confinement or jumps bail or flees to a foreign country, he loses his standing in court

and unless he surrenders or submits to the jurisdiction of the court he is deemed to have waived
any right to seek relief from the court.
Moreover, with the factual findings of the Court of Appeals that petitioner and her counsel were
duly served with copies of the assailed RTC orders and decision at the addresses they submitted
to the trial court, the petitioner was indeed afforded a fair and reasonable opportunity to be
heard. They cannot now complain of alleged violation of petitioners right to due process when it
was by their own fault that they lost the opportunity to present evidence.

CAN THE COURT IMPOSE OTHER CONDITIONS OR LIMITATIONS ON THE BAIL?

The trial court may impose other conditions in granting bail where the
likelihood of the accused jumping bail or of committing other harm to the citizenry is feared.
The court even has the power to prohibit a person admitted to bail from leaving the
Phiippines or restrict his right to travel.

DOES AN ADDITIONAL CONDITION NOT VIOLATE THE PROHIBITION ON EXCESSIVE BAIL?

No because the determination if there is excessive bail would depend on the facts
and circumstances of each case
Bail would still be determined based on the following factors--financial liability of
the accused to give bail; nature and circumstance of the offense; penalty for the
offense charged; character and reputation of the accused; age and health of the accused;
weight of the evidence against the accused; probability of the accused appearing at the trial;
forfeiture of other bail; the fact that the accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested;
and pendency of other cases where the accused is on bail.

SECTION. 3. No release or transfer except on court order or bail. No person under

detention by legal process shall be released or transferred except upon order of the court
or when he is admitted to bail.

ARTICLE 3, SECTION 13 OF THE CONSTITUTION:

All persons, except those charged with offenses punishable byreclusion perpetua when
evidence of guilt is strong, shall, beforeconviction, be bailable by sufficient sureties, or
be released on recognizance as may be provided by law. The right to bail shall not be impaired
even when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended. Excessive bail shall not be
required.

SEC. 4. Bail, a matter of right; exception. All persons in custody shall be admitted to bail
as a matter of right, with sufficient sureties, or released on recognizance as prescribed by
law or this Rule (a)before or after conviction by the Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial
Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court, and (b) before
conviction by the Regional Trial court of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion
perpetua, or life imprisonment.

When is bail a matter of right?

1. Before conviction by the MTC, MTC, or MCTC (Section 4 [a]);
2. After conviction by the MTC (Section 4 [a]);
3. Before conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or
life imprisonment (Section 4 [b])
4. Before conviction by the RTC of an offense punishable by death reclusion or life
imprisonment when evidence of guilt is not strong. (People vs. Donato, infra)

SECTION 5. Bail, when discretionary. Upon conviction by the Regional Trial Court of an
offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment, admission to
bail is discretionary. The application for bail may be filed and acted upon by the trial court
despite the filing of a notice of appeal, provided it has not transmitted the original record
to the appellate court. However, if the decision of the trial court conviction the accused
changed the nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the application for bail
can only be filed with and resolved by the appellate court.

When is bail discretionary? Meaning, the court may grant bail or may not grant bail.
Upon conviction by the Regional Trial Court of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion
perpetua, or life imprisonment, admission to bail is discretionary. The application for bail may be
filed and acted upon by the trial court despite the filing of a notice of appeal, provided it has not
transmitted the original record to the appellate court. However, if the decision of the trial court
conviction the accused changed the nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the
application for bail can only be filed with and resolved by the appellate court.
CASE: The accused was charged with homicide, there was no conviction yet. And then bail. He
jumped bail but he was arrested again. When arrested he applied for bail which was granted bail.
After a few months, he jumped bail again. He escaped then arrested again. And then he applied
for bail for the third time. This time, the judge said that, No more bail because of your character,
for jumping bail twice already. I will not grant you bail. And he questioned it before the court. Is
the denial of bail correct because of the past record of the accused?
The SC said NO because the bail is a matter of right. He falls under Section 4 there. There is still
no conviction. Even if he jumps bail 100 times you cannot deny him bail for as long as the crime
is not punishable by perpetua to death. (Sy Guan vs. Amparo, 79 Phil. 670; People vs.
Alano, 81 Phil. 19)

SECTION 6. Capital offense defined. A capital offense is an offense which, under the law
existing at the time of its commission and of the application for admission to bail, may be
punished with death.

What is a Capital Offense?

A capital offense is an offense which, under the law existing at the time of its commission and of
the application for admission to bail, may be punished with death.

SECTION. 7. Capital offense or an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life

imprisonment, not bailable. No person charged with a capital offense, or an offense
punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, shall be admitted to bail when
evidence of guilt is strong, regardless of the state of the criminal prosecution.

When is Bail denied?

If the accused is charged with a crime which is punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or life
imprisonment, there is NO BAIL even at the start of the trial or even before judgment of
conviction, provided that the two (2) conditions are present.

For bail to be denied, what are the requirements?

Under the law:
1. the evidence of guilt is strong;
2. the crime is punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment;
3. [based on jurisprudence] if the accused is convicted in all probability the penalty will
also be death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.

SEC. 8. Burden of proof in bail application. At the hearing of an application for bail filed by
a person who is in custody for the commission of an offense punishable by death,
reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment, the prosecution has the burden of showing that
evidence of guilt is strong. The evidence presented during the bail hearing shall be
considered automatically reproduced at the trial but, upon motion of either party, the
court may recall any witness for additional examination unless the latter is dead, outside
the Philippines, or otherwise unable to testify.

MUST THE DEFENSE PRESENT ANY EVIDENCE DURING THE HEARING ON THE
APPLICATION
FOR
BAIL?
No, the burden of proof is upon the prosecution to show that the evidence of guilt of
accused is strong

NOTE: The grant or denial of bail in capital offense hinges on the strength of the evidence of
guilt. This requires that the trial court to conduct bail hearings wherein both the prosecution
and the defense are afforded sufficient opportunity to present their respective evidence. The
burden of proof lies with the prosecution to show the evidence of guilt is strong. But the
determination of whether the evidence of guilt is strong is a matter of judicial discretion. Though
not absolute nor beyond control, the discretion of the trial court must be sound and exercised
within reasonable grounds.
PEOPLE vs. CALO
186 SCRA 620 [1990]
FACTS: Three (3) people were accused of murder for the death of the victim. The prosecution
recommended no bail. After a hearing to determine whether the evidence of guilt is strong, the
trial court issued the order granting bail. The son of the victim went to the SC questioning the
order granting the bail of the accused.
ISSUE: Whether or not the son of the victim has sufficient legal personality to question the order
granting bail? (Normally, if there is anyone who should question it, it should be the Solicitor
General representing the people of the Philippines)
HELD: While the rule is, only the Solicitor General may represent the People or the State in
criminal proceedings pending in this Court and the Court of Appeals, the ends of substantial
justice would be better served, and the issues in this action could be determined in a more just,
speedy and inexpensive manner, by entertaining the petition at bar. As an offended party in a
criminal case, private petitioner has sufficient personality and a valid grievance against the
judge's order granting bail to the alleged murderers of his (private petitioner's) father.

SECTION 9. Amount of bail; guidelines. The judge who issued the warrant or granted the
application shall fix a reasonable amount of bail considering primarily, but not limited to,
the following factors: (a) Financial liability of the accused to give bail; (b) Nature and
circumstance of the offense; (c) Penalty for the offense charged; (d) Character and
reputation of the accused; (e) Age and health of the accused; (f) Weight of the evidence
against the accused; (g) Probability of the accused appearing at the trial; (h) Forfeiture of
other bail; (i) The fact that the accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested; and (j)
Pendency of other cases where the accused is on bail. Excessive bail shall not be required.

When bail shall be granted, how much is the amount of it?

The judge who issued the warrant or granted the application shall fix a reasonable amount of bail
considering primarily, but not limited to, the following factors:

(a) Financial liability of the accused to give bail;

(b) Nature and circumstance of the offense;
(c) Penalty for the offense charged;
(d) Character and reputation of the accused;
(e) Age and health of the accused;
(f) Weight of the evidence against the accused;
(g) Probability of the accused appearing at the trial;
(h) Forfeiture of other bail;
(i) The fact that the accused was a fugitive from justice when arrested; and
(j) Pendency of other cases where the accused is on bail. Excessive bail shall not be required.

SECTION 11. Property bond, how posted. A property bond is an undertaking constituted
as lien on the real property given as security for the amount of the bail. Within ten (10)
days after the approval of the bond, the accused shall cause the annotation of the lien on
the certificate of title on file with the Registry of Deeds if the land is registered, or if
unregistered, in the Registration Book on the space provided therefore, in the Registry of
Deeds for the province or city where the land lies, and on the corresponding tax
declaration in the office of the provincial, city and municipal assessor concerned. Within
the same period, the accused shall submit to the court his compliance and his failure to do
so shall be sufficient cause for the cancellation of the property bond and his re-arrest and
detention.

What is a Property Bond?

A property bond is an undertaking constituted as lien on the real property given as security for
the amount of the bail.

SECTION. 14. Deposit of cash as bail. The accused or any person acting in his behalf may
deposit in cash with the nearest collector of internal revenue or provincial, city, or
municipal treasurer the amount of bail fixed by the court, or recommended by the
prosecutor who investigated or filed the case. Upon submission of a proper certificate of
deposit and a written undertaking showing compliance with the requirements of section 2
of this Rule, the accused shall be discharged from custody. The money deposited shall be
considered as bail and applied to the payment of fine and costs while the excess, if any,
shall be returned to the accused or to whoever made the deposit.

SECTION 15. Recognizance. Whenever allowed by law or these Rules, the court may
release a person in custody on his own recognizance or that of a responsible person.

How do you define recognizance?

A recognizance is an obligation of record, entered into before some court or magistrate duly
authorized to take it, with the condition to do some particular act, the most usual condition in
criminal cases being the appearance of the accused for trial. (People vs. Abner, 87 Phil. 566, 569)
SECTION 16. Bail, when not required; reduced bail or recognizance. No bail shall be required
when the law or these Rules so provide. When a person has been in custody for a period equal to
or more than the possible maximum imprisonment prescribed for the offense charged, he shall
be released immediately, without prejudice to the continuation of the trial or the proceedings on
appeal. If the maximum penalty to which the accused may be sentenced is destierro, he shall be

released after thirty (30) days of preventive imprisonment. A person in custody for a period equal
to or more than the minimum of the principal penalty prescribed for the offense charged, without
application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law or any modifying circumstance, shall be released
on a reduced bail or on his own recognizance, at the discretion of the court.

SECTION 17. Bail, where filed. (a) Bail in the amount fixed may be filed with the court
where the case is pending, or in the absence or unavailability of the judge thereof, with
any regional trial judge, metropolitan trial judge, municipal trial judge, or municipal circuit
trial judge in the province, city or municipality. If the accused is arrested in a province,
city, or municipality other than where the case is pending, bail may also be filed with any
regional trial court of said place, of if no judge thereof is available, with any metropolitan
trial judge, municipal trial judge, or municipal circuit trial judge therein. (b) Where the
grant of bail is a matter of discretion, or the accused seeks to be released on
recognizance, the application may only be filed in the court where the case is pending,
whether on preliminary investigation, trial, or appeal. Any person in custody who is not yet
charged in court may apply for bail with any court in the province, city, or municipality
where he is held.

NOTE: Section 17 is another important provision on where to file the bail. Normally, you
file the bail before the same court where you case is pending. But if the judge is not
around, under paragraph [a], any RTC judge, MTC judge, etc. can decided on the petition
for bail.

QUESTION: Suppose your case is in Davao and you are arrested in Manila, can you post bail in
Manila?
ANSWER: YES because it would be very tedious if you will be arrested and brought back in Davao
just to post bail. And under paragraph [a], it may be filed with any RTC of such place. And of
course, the judge there will accept the bail and transmit everything to Davao.

SECTION 21. Forfeiture of bail. When the presence of the accused is required by the court
or these Rules, his bondsmen shall be notified to produce him before the court on a given
date and time. If the accused fails to appear in person as required, his bail shall be
declared forfeited and the bondsmen given thirty (30) days within which to produce their
principal and to show why no judgment should be rendered against them for the amount
of their bail. Within the said period, the bondsmen must: (a) produce the body of their
principal or give the reason for his nonproduction; and (b) explain why the accused did not
appear before the court when first required to do so. Failing in these two requisites, a
judgment shall be rendered against the bondsmen, jointly and severally, for the amount of
the bail. The court shall not reduce or otherwise mitigate the liability of the bondsmen,
unless the accused has been surrendered or is acquitted.

NOTE: If you are required to appear in court for an arraignment, or for some other reason,
and you did not appear, the first step is, upon motion of the prosecution, the court will
issue an order to confiscate the bond and the court will also direct the bondsmen: 1. to
produce the body of their principal within 30 days; AND 2. to explain why the accused did
not appear before the court when first required to do so.

QUESTION: Suppose you failed to comply both or one of the conditions, what will happen?
ANSWER: The court will render judgement on the bond. Meaning, the bonding company is now
liable on its bond.

SEC. 23. Arrest of accused out on bail. For the purpose of surrendering the accused, the
bondsmen may arrest him or, upon written authority endorsed on a certified copy of the

undertaking, cause him to be arrested by a police officer or any other person of suitable
age and discretion. An accused released on bail may be re-arrested without the necessity
of a warrant if he attempts to depart from the Philippines without permission of the court
where the case is pending.
MANOTOC vs. COURT OF APPEALS
142 SCRA 149
ISSUE: How come if you are out on bail, you cannot leave the country without the permission of
the court?
HELD: A court has the power to prohibit a person admitted to bail from leaving the Philippines.
This is a necessary consequence of the nature and function of a bail bond. The condition imposed
upon petitioner to make himself available at all times whenever the court requires his presence
operates as a valid restriction on his right to travel. (because this is one of the conditions of the
bail bond you must be available whenever the court requires you to appear.) Indeed, if the
accused were allowed to leave the Philippines without sufficient reason, he may be placed
beyond the reach of the courts. If the sureties have the right to prevent the principal from
leaving the state, more so then has the court from which the sureties merely derive such right,
and whose jurisdiction over the person of the principal remains unaffected despite the grant of
bail to the latter. The court cannot allow the accused to leave the country without the assent of
the surety because in accepting a bail bond or recognizance, the government impliedly agrees
that it will not take any proceedings with the principal that will increase the risks of the sureties
or affect their remedies against him. Under this rule, the surety on a bail bond or recognizance
may be discharged by a stipulation inconsistent with the conditions thereof, which is made
without his assent.
SANTIAGO vs. GARCHITORENA
December 2, 1993
FACTS: Several criminal cases were filed against Miriam Santiago arising from her tenure as
Immigration Commissioner. Now, she was interviewed by the media and she said that she is
leaving in a few days for abroad because she was offered a fellowship grant by the Harvard
University. Sandiganbayan read the interview in the newspaper. A Hold-Departure Order was
issued. Santiago questioned the order.
ISSUE: May a court trying a criminal case issue a hold-departure order motu propio to prevent
the accused from leaving the country even if the prosecution did not file any motion to issue
such order?
HELD: YES. The court has the power to issue motu propio a hold-departure order. The holddeparture order is but an exercise of the courts inherent power to preserve and to maintain the
effectiveness of its jurisdiction over the case and the person of the accused.

SECTION 24. No bail after final judgment; exception. No bail shall be allowed after the
judgment of conviction has become final. If before such finality, the accused has applies
for probation, he may be allowed temporary liberty under his bail. When no bail was filed
or the accused is incapable of filing one, the court may allow his release on recognizance
to the custody of a responsible member of the community. In no case shall bail be allowed
after the accused has commenced to serve sentence.

CAN THE ACCUSED FILE A PETITION FOR BAIL AFTER A PROMULGATION?

No bail shall be allowed after the judgment of conviction has become final. If before such finality,
the accused has applies for probation, he may be allowed temporary liberty under his bail. When

no bail was filed or the accused is incapable of filing one, the court may allow his release on
recognizance to the custody of a responsible member of the community. In no case shall bail be
allowed after the accused has commenced to serve sentence.

SEC. 26. Bail not a bar to objections on illegal arrest, lack of or irregular preliminary
investigation. An application for or admission to bail shall not bar the accused from
challenging the validity of his arrest or the legality of the warrant issued therefore, or from
assailing the regularity or questioning the absence of a preliminary investigation of the
charge against him, provided that he raises them before entering his plea. The court shall
resolve the matter as early as practicable but not later than the start of the trial of the
case.

QUESTION: If you post bail, are you under estoppel to question the validity of the arrest or the
regularity or absence of a preliminary investigation?
ANSWER: Under Section 26, NO. The pivotal point is for as long as you have not yet entered your
plea. Once you entered your plea, all the defects are considered waived. But the posting of bail
alone is not considered as waiver to raise those issue.