G.R. No. L- 6494. November 24, 1954

Please log in to request a case brief.

96 Phil. 151

[ G.R. No. L- 6494. November 24, 1954 ]

EUGENIO ANGELES, ETC., PETITIONER, VS. FRANCISCO E. JOSE, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

D E C I S I O N



JUGO, J.:

Domingo Mejia y Soriano before the Court of First Instance of Manila
with the crime of damage to property in the sum of P654.22, and with
less serious physical injuries through reckless negligence, committed
in one single act. After the preliminary investigation, upon motion of
the defense, the respondent court dismissed the case on the ground that
the penalty prescribed by Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code is only
arresto mayor in its minimum and medium period which is within
the exclusive jurisdiction of the municipal court. On the other hand,
it is contended by the prosecution that the fine that may be imposed by
the court on account of the damage to property through reckless
negligence is from a sum equal to the amount of the damage to three
times such amount, which shall in no case be less than P25.00. The
respondent court, however, relies on the wording of the third paragraph
of said article, which reads as follows:

“When the execution of the act covered by this
article shall have only resulted in damage to the property of another,
the offender shall be punished by a fine ranging from an amount equal
to the value of said damage to three times such value, but which shall
in no case be less than 25 pesos.”

The above-quoted provision simply means that if there is only damage
to property the amount fixed therein shall be imposed, but there are
also physical injuries there should be an additional penalty for the
latter. The information cannot be split into two; one for physical
injuries, and another for the damage to property, for both the injuries
and the damage committed were caused by one single act of the defendant
and constitute what may called a complex crime of physical injuries and
damage to property. It is clear that the fine fixed by law in this case
is beyond the jurisdiction of the municipal court and within that of
the court of first instance.

In view of the foregoing, the order of dismissal is hereby set
aside, and the case remanded to the trial court for further
proceedings, without pronouncement as to costs.

Paras, C.J., Pablo, Bengzon, Padilla, Montemayor, Reyes, Bautista Angelo, Concepcion and Reyes, J.B.L., JJ. concur






Date created: July 14, 2017




Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post
Filter
Apply Filters