G.R. No.

L-1896 February 16, 1950

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,

vs.
RAFAEL BALMORES Y CAYA, defendant-appella

FACTS:

That on or about the 22nd day of September, 1947, in the City of Manila, Philippines, the said accused did then and there
wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously commence the commission of the crime of estafa through falsification of a security directly
by overt acts,

ISSUE:

From that sentence he appealed to this court, contending (1) that the facts lacked jurisdiction to convict him on a plea of guilty
because, being illiterate, he was not assisted by counsel.

RULING:

This contention is based on assumption not borne out by the record. The ticket alleged to have been falsified is before us and it
appears to be a 1/8 unit. We cannot take judicial notice of what is not of common knowledge. If relevant, should have been
proved. But if it is true that the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office did not issue 1/8 but only 1/4 units of tickets for the June
29, 1947, draw, that would only strengthen the theory of the prosecution that the 1/8 unit of a ticket which appellant presented to
the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office was spurious. The assumption that the true and real unidentified number of the ticket
alleged to have been torn was the winning number 074000, is likewise not supported by the record. The information to which
appellant pleaded guilty alleged that the appellant removed the true and real unidentified number of the ticket and substituted and
wrote in ink at the bottom on the left side of said ticket the figure or number 074000. It is obvious that there would have been no
need of removal and substitution if the original number on the ticket was the same as that which appellant wrote in ink in lieu
thereof.

RULE 120 – JUDGMENTTHE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

plaintiff-appellee, vs.
LICERIO P.SENDAYDIEGO, JUAN SAMSON and ANASTACIO QUIRIMIT,
defendants.
JUANSAMSON,
defendant-appellant.
G.R. No. L !!2"#
&
G.R. No. L !!2"! Jan$a%& 20, 1'(), AQUINO,
J.
It is settled that if the falsification was resorted to for the purpose of hiding the malversation, the falsification and malversation
are separate offenses.
FACTS*
In these three cases of malversation through falsification, the prosecution's theory is thatin 1969 Licerio P. endaydiego, the
provincial treasurer of Pangasinan, in conspiracy !ith "uan a m s o n y # a l v a n , a n e m p l o y e e o f a l u m $ e r a n d
hard!are store in %agupan i t y , a n d ! i t h nastacio (uirimit, the provincial auditor, as an accomplice,
used si) *6+ forged provincialvouchers in order to em$e le from the road and $ridge fund for P ,/0 .23.4he
provincial voucher in these cases has several parts5 upper part, to $e signed $y t!oofficials of the
provincial engineer's office and $ y the governor's representative middle part P a r a g r a p h 1 , $ y t h e
creditor Paragraph 2, $y the provincial engineer P a r a g r a p h 3 , $ y t h e provincial treasurer
Paragraph 0, $y the auditor Paragraph , $y the provincial treasurer. In theinstant cases paragraph 1 !as not signed presuma$ly
$ecause it is not relevant to the purchase of materials for pu$lic !or7s pro8ects. nd follo!ing paragraph , is the receipt of the
signed $y thecreditor. ccording to the prosecution, amson also signed on the left margin of the si) vouchers $elo! the stamped
!ords5 Presented to Prov. 4reasurer. :y
Juan Samson
. 4he lo!er court ac;uitted the auditor, (uirimit and found endaydiego and amsonguilty of malversation
through falsification of pu$lic or official documents. 4hus, endaydiegoand amson appealed to this ourt. <o!ever,
endaydiego died hence, his appeal as to hiscriminal lia$ility !as dismissed. 4he claim of complainant Province of
Pangasinan for the
civil liability
 survived endaydiego $ecause his death occurred after final 8udgment !as rendered $ythe =I, !hich convicted him of three
comple) crimes of malversation through falsification andordered him to indemnify the Province in the total sum of P61,/0 .23
*should $e P ,/0 .23+.4he civil action for the civil lia$ility is deemed impliedly instituted !ith the
criminalaction in the a$sence of e)press !aiver or its reservation in a separate action * ec. 1, >ule 111 of t h e > u l e s o f
c o u r t + . 4 h e c i v i l a c t i o n f o r t h e c i v i l l i a $ i l i t y i s s e p a r a t e a n d d i s t i n c t f r o m t h e criminal action.In
vie! o f the foregoing, not!ithstanding the dismissal of the appeal of the deceased e n d a y d i e g o i n s o f a r
as his criminal lia$ility is concerned, the o u r t r e s o l v e d t o c o n t i n u e e)ercising appellate
8urisdiction over his possi$le civil lia$ility for the money claims of theProvince of Pangasinan arising
from the alleged criminal acts complained of, as if no criminalcase had $een instituted against him, thus
ma7ing applica$le, in determining his civil lia$ility, rticle 3/ of the ivil ode and, for that purpose, his
counsel is directed to inform this ourt!ithin ten *1/+ days of the names and addresses of the decedent's
heirs or !hether or not hisestate is under administration and has a duly appointed 8udicial administrator.
aid heirs or administrator !ill $e su$stituted for the deceased insofar as the civil action for the civil lia$ilityis concerned
* ecs. 16 and 1 , >ule 3, >ules of ourt+.
ISSUE*
?hether or not several falsification and malversation are separate offenses and thusconstitute si) separate or
distinct offenses.
HELD*
Penalties
.@4he crimes committed in these three cases are not comple). eparate crimes
o f falsification and malversation !ere committed. 4hese are not cases !here the e)ecution of asingle act
constitutes t!o grave or less grave felonies or !here the falsification !as used as ameans to commit
malversation.In the si) vouchers the falsification !as used to conceal the malversation. It is settled thatif the falsification !as
resorted to for the purpose of hiding the malversation, the falsification andmalversation are separate offenses

PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. 247 July 18, 1973

PROHIBITING AND PENALIZING DEFACEMENT, MUTILATION, TEARING, BURNING OR

DESTRUCTION OF CENTRAL BANK NOTES AND COINS.

WHEREAS, the Central Bank has the sole right and authority to issue currency within the territory of
the Philippines under its issue power, and pursuant to Section 54 of Republic Act No. 265, otherwise
known as the "Central Bank Act," as amended, by Presidential Decree No. 72 dated November 29,
1972, the notes and coins issued by the Central Bank shall be fully guaranteed by the Government of
the Republic of the Philippines and shall be legal tender in the Philippines for all debts, both public
and private;

WHEREAS, Central Bank notes and coins are issued for circulation as medium of exchange and to
utilize them for other purposes does not speak well of the due respect and dignity befitting our
currency; and

WHEREAS, defacing, mutilating, tearing, or partially burning or destroying our currency by any means
renders it unfit for circulation, thereby unduly shortening its lifetime, and such acts unfavorably reflect
on the discipline of our people and create a bad image for our country;

NOW, THEREFORE, I, FERDINAND E. MARCOS, President of the Philippines, by virtue of the

powers vested in me by the Constitution as Commander-in-Chief of all the Armed Forces of the
Philippines and pursuant to Proclamation No. 1081 dated September 21, 1972, Proclamation No. 1104
dated January 17, 1973, and General Order No. 1 dated September 22, 1972, and in order to effect
the desired changes and reforms in the social, economic and political structure of our society, do
hereby order and decree:
 1. That it shall be unlawful for any person to willfully deface, mutilate, tear, burn or destroy, in
any manner whatsoever, currency notes and coins issued by the Central Bank of the
Philippines; and

2. That any person who shall violate this Decree shall, upon conviction, be punished by a
fine of not more than twenty thousand pesos and/or by imprisonment of not more than five
years.

All laws, orders and regulations, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are hereby modified or
repealed accordingly.

This Decree is hereby made part of the law of the land and shall take effect immediately after the
publication thereof in a newspaper of general circulation.

Done in the City of Manila, this 18th day of July, in the year of Our Lord, nineteen hundred and seventy-
three.

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. 100909. October 21, 1992.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SOLITO TENA, Defendant-Appellant.

The Solicitor General for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Federico M. Camalingan, Jr. for Accused-Appellant.

FACTS:
The familiar maxim, "res inter alios acta alteri nocere non debet" ("things done between strangers ought not
to injure those who are not parties to them") 1 embodied in Section 25, 2 Rule 130 of the Rules of Court
furnishes basis for the appellant’s acquittal in the case at bar.

Virgilio Conde and Solito Tena pleaded not guilty upon arraignment on November 12, 1989 15 as did
Adelberto Camota when arraigned on January 17, 1990. 16 Jose de Jesus and John Doe were never
apprehended and remain at large to date. Virgilio Conde later escaped from detention and was tried in
absentia.

ISSUE:

WON the accused is guilty of the crim

RULING:

On a principle of good faith and mutual convenience, a man’s own acts are binding upon himself, and are
evidence against him. So are his conduct and declarations. Yet it would not only be rightly inconvenient, but
also manifestly unjust, that a man should be bound by the acts of mere unauthorized strangers; and if a
party ought not to be bound by the acts of strangers, neither ought their acts or conduct be used as
evidence against him.
EN BANC

[G.R. No. 6896. October 23, 1911.]

THE UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ANTERO INOSANTO, Defendant-Appellant.

Lucas Gonzalez, for Appellant.

Attorney-General Villamor, for Appellee.

FACTS:

Antero Inosanto was charged with having committed this falsification in an official register, as he was the
municipal secretary whose duty it was to keep the same, and because, according to the complaint, he wrote
and recorded in the said register the following words: "Maxima Zausa, legitimate daughter of Pedro Zausa
and Caridad Zausa," which words are contrary to and different from those uttered by Pedro Zausa; the said
Inosanto thus perverting the truth in the narration of the facts.

ISSUE:

WON INOSANTO IS GUILTY OF FALSIFICATION

RULING:

The Attorney-General, in this instance, is of the opinion that, leaving aside the question as to whether the
defendant could issue the certificate Exhibit C and record therein facts contrary to or different from those
contained in the register book without incurring the crime of falsification with which he is charged, Antero
Inosanto certainly can not be sentenced under the said article 310 of the Penal Code, inasmuch as the
Exhibit C is not a certificate of merit or service, of good conduct, of poverty or of other similar
circumstances, that is to say, of purely personal things or accidentals, according to the interpretation given
to the words of this last phrase by the supreme court of Spain in its decision of February 17, 1877; but that
it is a certificate of an inscription in a register under his charge, with the data of which it substantially
agrees. Therefore he concluded that, with a reversal of the judgment appealed from, the defendant should
be acquitted, and the costs assessed de oficio.

G.R. No. L-19676 February 7, 1923

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs.

GERARDO AGNIS, Defendant-Appellant.

FACTS:
While the accused was on May 9, 1921, discharging the function of his office as
postmaster of the town of Dipolog, Zamboanga, a C.O.D. package arrived at the
post-office from the "Little Leather Library" of New York, At the inspection of that
office on the 30th day of that month of July, the officer who made the inspection,
Eugenio de Mesa, learned that there was such correspondence in that post-office,
but that the package was not in the safe where it should have been kept. If the
pamphlets in question can be considered as the documents or papers contemplated
in article 360 of the Penal Code, the application to the case now before us of this
legal provision would be obvious.
ISSUE:

WON Pamphlets can be considered as the documents or papers contemplated in

article 360 of the Penal Code
RULING:

The pamphlets in question cannot be said to evidence a fact, agreement or

disposition. They are rather merchandise as any other article usually sent by C.O.D.
mail. For this reason we think that the act complained of does not come within the
sanction of said article 360 of the Penal Code. chan roblesv irt ualawli bra ry cha nro bles vi rtua l law lib ra ry

[G.R. No. 5325. March 3, 1910. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. AMADEO CORRAL, Defendant-Appellant.

Basilio R. Mapa, for Appellant.

Attorney-General Villamor, for Appellee.

FACTS:

Attorney-General states that the signature of Captain Crame has been counterfeited with sufficient likeness;
that an order of arrest which had not been simulated; that an official documents has been imitated; that it
matters not that the same of the fiscal, who appears to have issued the same, is improperly written, or that
the signature of Captain Crame lacks a de, which he uses in signing, or that the document should bear no
official seal or heading because, on the other hand, the official titles "Assistant Prosecuting Attorney" and
"Captain of Police," following the signatures, and the wording of the order of arrest being in due form, are of
more importance than the seal, the heading, and the exactness of the signatures in including belief in the
truth of what was set forth; that this is true to such extent that the municipal president of Corregidor
hastened to comply with the order in question, believing it a genuine one contained in a request which he
also thought was genuine made by the said captain of police.

ISSUE:

WON THERE IS FALSICATION

RULING:

As the crime of falsification punished by article 301 in connection with article 300 (No. 1), of the Penal Code
has been committed, without any circumstance modifying the liability therefore, the judgment appealed
from is in accordance with the merits of the case, the provisions of the law, and the contentions of the
Attorney-General.

EN BANC

G.R. No. L-67472 July 3, 1987

DARIO CABIGAS Y CACHO, petitioner,

vs.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.

FACTS:
Under separate informations both dated September 20, 1982, the Office of the Tanodbayan charges
Dario Cabigas y Cacho and Benedicto Reynes y Lopez on two (2) counts, with the crime of
Falsification of Official Documents allegedly committed

ISSUE:

WON falsification by an employee is the crime

RULING:

It is a settled doctrine that in falsification by an employee under par. No. 4 of Article 171, which reads-
"by making untruthful statements in a narration of facts,"-the following elements must concur-

(a) That the offender makes in a document untruthful statements in a narration of facts;

(b) That he has a legal obligation to disclose the truth of the facts narrated by him;

(c) That the facts narrated by the offender are absolutely false; and

(d) That the perversion of truth in the narration of facts was made with the wrongful intent of
injuring a third person.

All the elements are present in this case.