Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Zaldivia vs. Reyes Jr.
Zaldivia vs. Reyes Jr.
*
G.R. No. 102342. July 3, 1992.
_______________
*EN BANC.
278
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001697aee60055200f9f2003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/10
3/14/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 211
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001697aee60055200f9f2003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 2/10
3/14/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 211
279
CRUZ, J.:
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001697aee60055200f9f2003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/10
3/14/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 211
_________________
1Rollo, p. 18.
2Ibid.
280
xxx
Section9. How commenced.—The prosecution of criminal cases
falling within the scope of this Rule shall be either by complaint
or by information filed directly in court without need of a prior
preliminary examination or preliminary investigation: Provided,
however, That in Metropolitan Manila and chartered cities, such
cases shall be commenced only by information; Provided, further,
That when the offense cannot be prosecuted de oficio, the
corresponding complaint shall be signed and sworn to before the
fiscal by the offended party.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001697aee60055200f9f2003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 4/10
3/14/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 211
281
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001697aee60055200f9f2003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 5/10
3/14/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 211
______________
282
_______________
284
8
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001697aee60055200f9f2003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 8/10
3/14/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 211
8
six months, and is thus covered by the Rule on Summary
Procedure.
The Court realizes that under the above interpretation,
a crime may prescribe even if the complaint is filed
seasonably with the prosecutor’s office if, intentionally or
not, he delays the institution of the necessary judicial
proceedings until it is too late. However, that possibility
should not justify a misreading of the applicable rules
beyond their obvious intent as reasonably deduced from
their plain language. The remedy is not a distortion of the
meaning of the rules but a rewording thereof to prevent the
problem here sought to be corrected.
Our conclusion is that the prescriptive period for the
crime imputed to the petitioner commenced from its alleged
commission on May 11, 1990, and ended two months
thereafter, on July 11, 1990, in accordance with Section 1 of
Act No. 3326. It was not interrupted by the filing of the
complaint with the Office of
________________
285
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001697aee60055200f9f2003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 9/10
3/14/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 211
——Zo0o——Z
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001697aee60055200f9f2003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 10/10