Hector Treas, Petitioner, - Versus - People of The Philippines, Respondent. G. R. No. 195002 January 25, 2012 Ponente: Sereno, J.

HECTOR TREAS,
Petitioner,
- versus -
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent.
G. R. No. 195002 January 25, 2012
PONENTE: SERENO, J.:
FACTS:
Sometime in December 1999, Margarita Alocilja (Margarita)

wanted to buy a house-and-lot in Iloilo City covered by TCT No.
109266. It was then mortgaged with Maybank. The bank manager
Joselito Palma recommended the appellant Hector Treas (Hector)
to private complainant Elizabeth, who was an employee and niece
of Margarita, for advice regarding the transfer of the title in the
latters name. Hector informed Elizabeth that for the titling of the
property in the name of her aunt Margarita, the following expenses
would be incurred:
P20,000.00- Attorneys fees,

P90,000.00- Capital Gains Tax,
P24,000.00- Documentary Stamp,
P10,000.00- Miscellaneous Expenses.
Thereafter, Elizabeth gave P150,000.00 to Hector who

issued a corresponding receipt dated December 22, 1999 and
prepared [a] Deed of Sale with Assumption of Mortgage.
Subsequently, Hector gave Elizabeth Revenue Official Receipt
Nos. 00084370 for P96,000.00 and 00084369 for P24,000.00.
However, when she consulted with the BIR, she was informed that
the receipts were fake. When confronted, Hector admitted to her
that the receipts were fake and that he used the P120,000.00 for
his other transactions. Elizabeth demanded the return of the
money.
To settle his accounts, appellant Hector issued in favor of

Elizabeth a Bank of Commerce check No. 0042856 dated
November 10, 2000 in the amount of P120,000.00, deducting from
P150,000.00 the P30,000.00 as attorneys fees. When the check
was deposited with the PCIBank, Makati Branch, the same was
dishonored for the reason that the account was closed.
Notwithstanding repeated formal and verbal demands, appellant
failed to pay. Thus, the instant case of Estafa was filed against him.
On 29 October 2001, an Information was filed by the Office of the
City Prosecutor before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), both of
Makati City.
ISSUE:
WON the court of Makati has jurisdiction over the case.
RULING:
No, Although the prosecution alleged that the check issued

by petitioner was dishonored in a bank in Makati, such dishonor is
not an element of the offense of estafa under Article 315, par. 1 (b)
of the RPC.
Indeed, other than the lone allegation in the information,

there is nothing in the prosecution evidence which even mentions
that any of the elements of the offense were committed in Makati.
The rule is settled that an objection may be raised based on the
ground that the court lacks jurisdiction over the offense charged, or
it may be considered motu proprio by the court at any stage of the
proceedings or on appeal. Moreover, jurisdiction over the subject
matter in a criminal case cannot be conferred upon the court by the
accused, by express waiver or otherwise. That jurisdiction is
conferred by the sovereign authority that organized the court and is
given only by law in the manner and form prescribed by law.
It has been consistently held by this Court that it is unfair to

require a defendant or accused to undergo the ordeal and expense
of a trial if the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter or
offense or it is not the court of proper venue. Section 15 (a) of Rule
110 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure of 2000 provides
that subject to existing laws, the criminal action shall be instituted
and tried in the court of the municipality or territory where the
offense was committed or where any of its essential ingredients
occurred. This fundamental principle is to ensure that the
defendant is not compelled to move to, and appear in, a different
court from that of the province where the crime was committed as it
would cause him great inconvenience in looking for his witnesses
and other evidence in another place.
This principle echoes more strongly in this case, where, due

to distance constraints, coupled with his advanced age and failing
health, petitioner was unable to present his defense in the charges
against him.
There being no showing that the offense was committed

within Makati, the RTC of that city has no jurisdiction over the case.
As such, there is no more need to discuss the other issue

raised by petitioner.
WHEREFORE, the Petition is GRANTED. The Decision

dated 9 July 2010 and the Resolution dated 4 January 2011 issued
by the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 32177 are SET ASIDE
on the ground of lack of jurisdiction on the part of the Regional Trial
Court, Branch 137, Makati City. Criminal Case No. 01-2409 is
DISMISSED without prejudice.

Hector Treas, Petitioner, - Versus - People of The Philippines, Respondent. G. R. No. 195002 January 25, 2012 Ponente: Sereno, J.

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hector Treas, Petitioner, - Versus - People of The Philippines, Respondent. G. R. No. 195002 January 25, 2012 Ponente: Sereno, J.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hector Treas, Petitioner, - Versus - People of The Philippines, Respondent. G. R. No. 195002 January 25, 2012 Ponente: Sereno, J.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

HECTOR TREAS,

Sometime in December 1999, Margarita Alocilja (Margarita)

P20,000.00- Attorneys fees,

Thereafter, Elizabeth gave P150,000.00 to Hector who

To settle his accounts, appellant Hector issued in favor of

WON the court of Makati has jurisdiction over the case.

No, Although the prosecution alleged that the check issued

Indeed, other than the lone allegation in the information,

It has been consistently held by this Court that it is unfair to

This principle echoes more strongly in this case, where, due

There being no showing that the offense was committed

As such, there is no more need to discuss the other issue

WHEREFORE, the Petition is GRANTED. The Decision

You might also like