CRIMPRO DIGEST GO1
ATTY. SANIDAD
AGUSTIN v PAMINTUAN [G.R. No. 164938. August 22, 2005] Ponente: Calleja Sr.
RECIT READY:
Prosecutor of Baguio filed a libel complaint against Agustin, a columnist, wrote an article that was
allegedly malicious and defamatory against complainant De Leon. Agustin question the validity of the
jurisdictionn of the RTC of Baguio stating that the information does give the RTC of Baguio
Jurisdiction over the case. The issue in this case is whether or not RTC of Baguio has jurisdiction over
the libel case filed against Agustin and WON information can be amended. The SC held that the
information, lacking allegations of residency of the complainant and the fact that the article was first
published in baguio, does not imbued the RTC of Baguio jurisdiction over the case. It cannot also be
inferred that because de leon works in baguio, he is a resident. On the issue of amending the
information, defect in the information are substantial defect, thus amendments of the information to
vest jurisdiction upon the court cannot be allowed.
DOCTRINE:
Venue in criminal cases is an essential element of jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of a court over the
criminal case is determined by the allegations in the complaint or Information, and the offense must
have been committed or any one of its essential ingredients took place within the territorial jurisdiction
of the court.
FACTS:
June 13, 2000, Prosecutor of Baguio filed 4 separate informations before the RTC of Baguio
charging Agustin, a Phil Daily Inquirer Columnist, with libel. The information provides that on March
17, 2000, he maliciously wrote a defamatory article about private respondent De Leon, the acting
general manager of Baguio Country Club, acquiring a house at Greenhills formerly owned by Former
President Marcos, which was described as “the trysting place of marcos and actress Dovie Beams.”
The house was said to be under the investigation of the BIR and that the transfer of title from Marcos
to De Leon was spurious.
Agustin Pleaded not guilty and then filed a motion to quash the information on the ground
that the court had no jurisdiction over the offenses charged.
De Leon opposed the motion alleging that he was a bona fide resident of Baguio Country
Club located in Baguio and he was also the acting general manager of the club at the time the libelous
article was published. He also claims that Agustin is estopped from assailing lack of jurisdiction
because he was already arraigned.
Agustin replied saying that the information does not provide that De Leon was an actual
resident of Baguio. He insisted that to construe the word community in the Informations to mean the
community in Baguio City would be to unduly strain the limits of a fair interpretation; there must be
clear and positive allegations in the Informations that the private complainant actually resided in
Baguio City. And that he is not estopped from assailing jurisdiction because lack of jurisdiction is a
matter which can be dealt with at any time.
RTC of Baguio denied the motion because it was reasonable to infer that De Leon is a
resident of Baguio at the time the article was published.
Agustin filed an MR insisting that because De Leon is the manager of Baguio Country Club
does not necessarily meant that he is a resident of Baguio. But, the MR was denied by the RTC.
Agustin filed a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition before the CA claiming the RTC
committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in denying his motion
to quash.
Topic: Jurisdiction; Venue is jurisdictional in criminal cases;
based on allegations; burden of proof:
CA upheld the decision of the RTC saying that the article was first published in Baguio. The
lack of indication is a mere formal and not substantial defect in the information, which can be amended
before the accused enters a plea to the charge. The CA further ruled that any amendment to the
residency requirement would not place the accused at a disadvantage.
Agustin filed an MR before the CA and was denied. Thus, this case before the Supreme
Court. Agustin insists that the CA committed grave abuse of discretion by denying his motion to quash.
ISSUE/S:
1. WON RTC has jurisdiction over the offense?
2. WON Informations may be amended to cure defects?
HELD:
1. NO, the RTC of Baguio does not have jurisdiction over the case.
Article 360 of the RPC which provides the rules on venue on Libel cases indicated that complaints of
libel should be filed at the place where the article was first published, where any of the offended parties
actually resides at the time of the commission of the offense. If the offended is a public officer whose
office is in Manila at the time the commission of the offense, action may be filed at the CFI of Manila.
If the offended public officer holding office outside of Manila, the action may be filed in the CFI of the
province or city at the time of the commission of the offense.
it is also a rule that to obviate issue as to the venue of criminal action, the information should contain
allegation as to whether the offended is a public officer, his office, his residence, and where the article
was first published.
In the case at hand, the information did not indicate the residence of the offended nor where the article
was first published. It cannot even be inferred that De Leon was a resident due to his work as the acting
general Manager of the Baguio country club. To create residence, two fundamental elements are
essential to establish residence: actual bodily presence and freely exercised intention. It is entirely
possible that the private complainant may have been actually residing in another place. Thus, the RTC
of Baguio does not have jurisdiction
2. Defect in the information are substantial defect, thus amendments of the information to vest
jurisdictionn upon the court cannot be allowed.
Thus the petition of Agustin is Granted