PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PALINTIFF AND APPELLANT, VS. EMILIANO PEÑAS Y FERRER, DEFENDANT AND APPELLEE; PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, VS. LAUREANO REY Y R…

The accused-appellees in the above-entitled cases were charged in
the Quezon City Branch of the Court of First Instance of Rizal with the
crime of qualified theft, the property stolen not exceeding P200 in
value in each case. For alleged lack of jurisdiction, Judge Ceferino de
los Santos dismissed the information in both cases and the fiscal
appealed.

The crime charged is penalized in Article 309, case 5, in relation to Article 310 of the Revised Penal Code, with prision correccional in its full extent, i.e., imprisonment of six months and one day to six years.

Whether the original jurisdiction conferred on justices of the peace and judges of municipal courts by section 87 ( c),
paragraph 3, of Republic Act 296 is exclusive or concurrent with the
court of first instance, has been resolved by this court in its
decision of May 11, 1950, in the case of People vs. Francisco Palmon, supra, p. 350, wherein we said:

“1. Section 44 (f) of the Judiciary Act of
1948 expressly confers original jurisdiction on the Courts of First
Instance over all criminal cases, like the present, in which the
penalty provided by law is imprisonment for more than six months, or a
fine of more than two hundred pesos. And section 87 of the same Act
also confers original jurisdiction on justices of the peace and judges
of municipal courts of chartered cities over all criminal
cases arising under the laws relating to assaults where the intent to
kill is not charged or evident upon the trial. The serious physical
injuries charged in the information resulted from such assault. There
is no inconsistency in giving two courts concurrent jurisdiction over
the same offense. To construe section 87 (c) as conferring exclusive
original jurisdiction on justices of the peace and judges of municipal
courts over all criminal cases therein enumerated, would be to nullify
pro tanto section 44 (f) of the same Act. A statute must be so construed as to harmonize and give effect to all its provisions whenever possible.

“2. Formerly judges of municipal courts of chartered cities had
concurrent jurisdiction with the Courts of First Instance over all
criminal cases mentioned in section 87 (c), while justices of
the peace did not. Sections 86 and 87 of Republic Act No. 296 put
justices of the peace and judges of municipal courts on the same level
by giving them the same jurisdiction in both criminal and civil cases.
Section 87 (c) of Republic Act No. 296 was adopted from the
provisions of the Revised Administrative Code on Chartered Cities with
regard to the jurisdiction of municipal courts. Both sections 2468
(Manila) and 2562-A (Baguio) of the Revised Administrative Code provide
that the municipal court ‘shall also have concurrent
jurisdiction with the Court of First Instance over all criminal cases
arising under the laws relating to gambling and management of
lotteries, to assaults where the intent to kill is not charged or evident upon the trial, to larceny, embezzlement and estafa
where the amount of money or property stolen, embezzled or otherwise
involved does not exceed the sum or value of two hundred pesos, to the
sale of intoxicating liquors, to falsely impersonating an officer, to
malicious mischief, to trespass on Government or private property and
to threatening to take human life.’

“From the foregoing
considerations, it seems clear that the jurisdiction given to justices
of the peace and judges of municipal courts over all criminal cases
enumerated in paragraph (c) of section 87 of the Judiciary Act of 1943 is not exclusive but concurrent with the Courts of First Instance.

“The trial court therefore erred in dismissing this case for lack of jurisdiction.”

The order of dismissal in each of the two above-entitled cases is
reversed and the cases are ordered remanded to the court of origin for
further proceedings, without any finding as to costs.

Pablo, Bengzon, Tuason, Montemayor, and Reyes, JJ., concur.