JOSE BELEY, IN HIS CAPACITY AS REGISTRAR OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES OFFICE. NUEVA ECIJA AGENCY, PETITIONER, VS. HON. GENARO TAN TORRES, AS JUDGE OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF NUE…

Beley versus Torres

The Case

This is a petition for certiorari with preliminary injunction brought by Jose Beley, in his capacity as Registrar of the Motor Vehicles Office of the Nueva Ecija Agency, against Judge Genaro Tan Torres of the Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija. The Registrar asks the Supreme Court to set aside the judge's order commanding him to return a license plate and a driver's license to Felix Marbella and to the driver Quirico Curamen. The case matters because it draws a clean line between the power of a court over persons properly before it and the right of a public officer to hold articles that are the instruments or the evidence of an offense, even where that officer was never made a party to the suit.

Procedural History

Felix Marbella filed a civil case in the Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija against the chief of police, the mayor, and two police officers of Rizal, Nueva Ecija, complaining of the illegal detention of his truck and its plate and praying for their release and for damages. On motion and upon a bond, the trial court ordered the truck released. Later, Marbella filed a motion in the same civil case asking that the plate number and the driver's license be released by the defendants or by the Registrar of the Motor Vehicles Office. Neither the Registrar nor the driver was a party to that case. Acting on the motion, the trial court issued an order directing the defendants and the then Registrar, German Magno, to return the plate and the license. Marbella then moved to amend the order so that it would be directed to Jose Beley, who had replaced Magno. The Registrar entered a special appearance solely to object to the jurisdiction of the court over him, and he asked for reconsideration. The trial court denied the objection and amended its order accordingly. The Registrar then came to the Supreme Court on certiorari.

Facts

On the ninth of May, 1960, Felix Marbella sued the chief of police and other officers of Rizal, Nueva Ecija, over the seizure and detention of his truck with ten tires and its plate. On motion and bond, the trial court ordered the truck released.

On the twenty-fifth of May, 1960, two of the defendants again tried to seize the truck but succeeded only in taking its plate number and the driver's license of Quirico Curamen. Marbella then filed a criminal complaint for grave coercion against the two officers with the Provincial Fiscal.

On the fifth of July, 1960, Marbella's counsel moved in the civil case for the release of the plate and the license by the defendants or by the Registrar. The trial court granted the motion, first naming Registrar German Magno, then amending the order to name Jose Beley as his successor. The records showed that the plate had been reported lost in the Motor Vehicles Office and was registered in the name of another person, and that the truck was not registered for the current year. The Registrar objected that the court had acquired jurisdiction neither over his person nor over that of his predecessor.

Issues

• Whether or not the trial court validly ordered the Registrar of the Motor Vehicles Office, who was never a party to the civil case, to return the plate number and the driver's license.
• Whether or not the Registrar may lawfully retain the plate and the driver's license as instruments or evidence of a violation of the Motor Vehicle Law.

Applicable Provisions

Section 36 of the Motor Vehicle Law is invoked by the Court as the provision violated by the use of the plate:

Section 36. No person shall operate any motor vehicle on any public highway without the corresponding certificate of registration and plates.

This provision supplies the offense that justifies the seizure and the retention of the plate and the license.

Section 21 of the same law is likewise cited by the Court:

Section 21. No vehicle shall be operated on the public highways without the corresponding certificate of registration and plates.

It reinforces that the operation of an unregistered vehicle with a plate belonging to another is a violation of the Motor Vehicle Law.

Section 12 of Rule 122 of the Rules of Court is quoted by the Court as the authority for retention:

Section 12. The police or the public prosecuting officer may retain the thing stolen, or anything which may be used as proof of the commission of the offense.

This provision is the basis for holding that the Registrar may keep the articles as evidence of the offense.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court noted the Registrar's objection that he and his predecessor were not parties to the original action, so that the order for delivery was beyond the jurisdiction of the court. The Court called the objection a technical one and chose not to rest its decision on that ground.

On the second issue, the Court held that the Registrar had the right to retain possession of the articles because they are the instruments of an offense or evidence thereof. The plate had been reported lost and was being used on a truck that was not registered, and the driver's license was to be used as evidence against the driver. The Court therefore set aside the order of the trial court and ordered the articles returned to the petitioner.

Doctrine

A court cannot, by a mere motion in a case to which a public officer is not a party, compel that officer to surrender articles that he lawfully holds as instruments or evidence of an offense. The police or the public prosecuting officer may retain the thing stolen, or anything which may be used as proof of the commission of the offense, and that right of retention prevails over an order of release issued in a civil case to which the officer was never joined. The Registrar of the Motor Vehicles Office, acting under the Motor Vehicle Law, may impound a plate and a driver's license where the vehicle is operated without registration and with a plate belonging to another.

Disposition

The Supreme Court granted the writ, set aside the order of the trial court, and ordered the plate and the driver's license returned to the petitioner, with costs against Felix Marbella.

Remember This

The single line to memorize is that a public officer may retain articles that are the instruments or the evidence of an offense, and a court cannot order their release in a case to which he is not a party. Examiners use this case to test the limits of a court's jurisdiction over non-parties and the police power to hold evidence under the Rules of Court.