Scribd
Upload
1K views2 pages

G.R. No. 192565

This case involves Tomas, who was charged with perjury for making false statements in a Certificate Against Forum Shopping filed in a civil case regarding money owed. The issue is whether the proper venue for the perjury charge is Makati City, where the certificate was notarized, or Pasay City, where it was submitted to the court. The Supreme Court of the Philippines held that Makati City is the proper venue, as the crime of perjury is committed when the affidavit is sworn to, making the notarization location the site of an essential element of the offense. Venue is proper where any essential ingredients of a crime take place.

Uploaded by

Eap Bustillo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
1K views2 pages

G.R. No. 192565

This case involves Tomas, who was charged with perjury for making false statements in a Certificate Against Forum Shopping filed in a civil case regarding money owed. The issue is whether the proper venue for the perjury charge is Makati City, where the certificate was notarized, or Pasay City, where it was submitted to the court. The Supreme Court of the Philippines held that Makati City is the proper venue, as the crime of perjury is committed when the affidavit is sworn to, making the notarization location the site of an essential element of the offense. Venue is proper where any essential ingredients of a crime take place.

Uploaded by

Eap Bustillo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Union Bank of the Philippines and Desitomas

vs.
People of the Philippines
G.R. No. 192565, February 28, 2012
PONENTE: BRION, J.

FACTS:

Tomas was charged in court for perjury under Article 183 of


the Revised Penal Code (RPC) for making a false narration in a
Certificate against Forum Shopping.

The accusation stemmed from petitioner Union Bank’s two


(2) complaints for sum of money with prayer for a writ of replevin
against the spouses Eddie and Eliza Tamondong and a John Doe.
The first complaint, docketed as Civil Case No. 98-0717, was
filed before the RTC, Branch 109, and Pasay City on April 13,
1998. The second complaint, docketed as Civil Case No. 342-
000, was filed on March 15, 2000 and raffled to the MeTC, Branch
47, and Pasay City.  Both complaints showed that Tomas executed
and signed the Certification against Forum Shopping. Accordingly,
she was charged of deliberately violating Article 183 of the RPC by
falsely declaring under oath in the Certificate against Forum
Shopping in the second complaint that she did not commence any
other action or proceeding involving the same issue in another
tribunal or agency.

ISSUE:

What the proper venue of perjury under Article 183 of the


RPC should be – Makati City, where the Certificate against Forum
Shopping was notarized, or Pasay City, where the Certification was
presented to the trial court.
 

HELD:

We deny the petition and hold that the MeTC-Makati City is


the proper venue and the proper court to take cognizance of the
perjury case against the petitioners.

Both provisions categorically place the venue and jurisdiction


over criminal cases not only in the court where the offense was
committed, but also where any of its essential ingredients took
place.  In other words, the venues of
action and of jurisdiction are deemed sufficiently alleged where the
Information states that the offense was committed or some of its
essential ingredients occurred at a place within the territorial
jurisdiction of the court.

Based on these considerations, we hold that our ruling


in SyTiong is more in accord with Article 183 of the RPC and
Section 15(a), Rule 110 of the 2000 Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure. To reiterate for the guidance of the Bar and the Bench,
the crime of perjury committed through the making of a false
affidavit under Article 183 of the RPC is committed at the time the
affiant subscribes and swears to his or her affidavit since it is at
that time that all the elements of the crime of perjury are
executed.  When the crime is committed through false testimony
under oath in a proceeding that is neither criminal nor civil, venue
is at the place where the testimony under oath is given.  If in lieu of
or as supplement to the actual testimony made in a proceeding that
is neither criminal nor civil, a written sworn statement is submitted,
venue may either be at the place where the sworn statement is
submitted or where the oath was taken as the taking of the oath
and the submission are both material ingredients of the crime
committed. In all cases, determination of venue shall be based on
the acts alleged in the Information to be constitutive of the crime
committed. 
 

You might also like