People v. Rosario
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Defendant Juan del Rosario, a policeman, was charged with maltreatment of a detention prisoner. The information alleged that on or about March 28, 1957, he confined Emilio Sy in the municipal jail and, to extort a confession, maltreated Sy by punching, kicking, and pulling his hair, causing injuries that required medical treatment for three to four days. Procedural History: The Court of First Instance of La Union found the defendant guilty of slight physical injuries under Article 266, paragraph 2, of the Revised Penal Code, sentencing him to 15 days of arresto menor. The court did not convict him of the original charge due to insufficient proof that Sy was a detention prisoner under his charge. The Petition: The defendant appealed directly to the Supreme Court, admitting liability for slight physical injuries but contending that the crime had prescribed, as the information was filed more than six months after its commission, exceeding the two-month prescriptive period for light offenses.
Issue(s)
Whether the filing of a complaint with the Provincial Fiscal's Office for preliminary investigation interrupts the prescriptive period for light offenses. Whether the crime of slight physical injuries, a light offense, had prescribed when the information was filed in court more than two months after its commission and discovery.
Ruling
The sentence appealed from is reversed, and the case is dismissed, with costs de oficio.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of prescription of offenses: The Supreme Court reiterated that under Article 90 of the Revised Penal Code, light offenses prescribe in two months. Article 91 provides that the prescriptive period commences from the discovery of the crime and is interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information. Crucially, the Court clarified, citing People vs. Tayco, that the "complaint or information" referred to in Article 91, which interrupts the running of the prescriptive period, is that which is filed in the proper court, not the denuncia or accusation lodged by the offended party in the Fiscal's Office for preliminary investigation. Therefore, the filing of the complaint with the Provincial Fiscal's Office prior to April 25, 1957, did not interrupt the prescriptive period for the offense of slight physical injuries. On whether the crime had prescribed: The Court found that the information for slight physical injuries, a light offense, was admittedly filed in court more than two months after the commission and discovery of the offense. Since the filing of the complaint with the Fiscal's Office did not interrupt the prescriptive period, and the subsequent filing in court occurred beyond the two-month period prescribed for light offenses, the crime had indeed prescribed. Consequently, the defendant could not legally be convicted of slight physical injuries.
Main Doctrine
The filing of a complaint or accusation with the Fiscal's Office for preliminary investigation does not interrupt the prescriptive period for light offenses; only the filing of the complaint or information in the proper court does.