Bernardo v. People

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. 182210. March 7, 2012.]

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames :

Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 07 March 2012 which reads as follows:

G.R. No. 182210 (Paz Bernardo v. People of the Philippines). —This is a petition for review on certiorari 1 filed by petitioner Paz T. Bernardo from the August 31, 2007 decision 2 and March 14, 2008 resolution 3 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA G.R. CR No. 28721.

In its May 28, 2003 decision, 4 the Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 56, convicted the petitioner of five (5) counts of violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. (B.P.) 22.5 The trial court sentenced her to one (1) year imprisonment for each count, and to indemnify private complainant Carmencita C. Bumanglag the amount of P460,000.00, plus 12% interest and 5% penalty charges, from December 1, 1991 until full payment. DaCEIc

On appeal, the CA affirmed the petitioner's conviction, but deleted the penalty of imprisonment. It imposed a P460,000.00 fine and ordered the petitioner to indemnify private complainant Bumanglag P460,000.00, plus 12% interest from the time of the institution of the criminal charges in court until full payment. 6

When the CA denied her motion for reconsideration, 7 the petitioner filed the present petition.

On March 14, 2011, the petitioner's counsel informed the Court of the petitioner's death on February 3, 2011, as well as the names of the petitioner's heirs (her widower, Mapalad Bernardo, and children: Emilie B. Ko, Marilou B. Valdez, Edwin T. Bernardo, and Gervy B. Santos) and their address (26 Magdiwang St., Real Village 2, Tandang Sora, Quezon City). 8

In a November 23, 2011 Resolution, the Court required the petitioner's counsel to submit a duly authenticated copy of the petitioner's death certificate. 9

On January 17, 2012, the petitioner's counsel submitted the petitioner's duly authenticated death certificate. 10

It is an established principle that the death of the accused pending final adjudication of the criminal case extinguishes the accused's criminal liability. If the civil liability directly arose from and is based solely on the offense committed, then the civil liability is likewise extinguished. 11

In this case, the petitioner's civil liability for the recovery of the face value of the checks does not appear to directly result from, or is based solely on, the crime of violation of B.P. 22, but on a contract of loan between the petitioner and the private complainant, evidenced by a June 1991 promissory note. Thus, the civil liability survives and an action for recovery can be instituted in a separate civil action either against the executor or administrator of the estate of the petitioner.

We have always stressed that rules of procedure are mere tools designed to facilitate the attainment of justice and this Court is empowered to suspend their operation, or make an exception of a particular case from their operation, when their rigid application tends to frustrate rather than promote the ends of justice. 12 To dismiss the present case and require the private complainant to file a separate civil action will be costly, burdensome and time-consuming, and would further delay the final disposition of this case, pending since 1993. This multiplicity of suits must be avoided. A delay in the resolution of a case is, ultimately, a delay of justice and, thus, a denial thereof. Pursuant to Section 16, Rule 3 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, we hold that it is both necessary and appropriate to require the deceased petitioner's heirs to appear as substitute parties in the present case with respect to the deceased petitioner's civil liability for the checks the deceased issued. Thereafter, we shall decide the case on the merits with respect to the deceased petitioner's civil liability.

WHEREFORE, the heirs of the deceased petitioner, Paz T. Bernardo, namely: Mapalad Bernardo, Emilie B. Ko, Marilou B. Valdez, Edwin T. Bernardo, and Gervy B. Santos, are hereby ORDERED, within thirty (30) days from notice, to be impleaded, and to appear and substitute for the deceased petitioner in the present petition on the civil liability aspects of this case. The case shall thereafter be submitted for decision by this Court, unless these parties request for the opportunity to submit supplemental pleadings.

SO ORDERED. IHDCcT

Very truly yours,

(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court

 

Footnotes

1.Filed under Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure; rollo, pp. 7-38.

2.Penned by Associate Justice Rosmari D. Carandang, and concurred in by Associate Justices Marina L. Buzon and Mariflor P. Punzalan Castillo; id. at 42-57.

3.Id. at 58-59.

4.Docketed as Criminal Case Nos. 93-3316 to 93-3320; id. at 42-43.

5.Otherwise known as "An Act Penalizing the Making or Drawing and Issuance of a Check Without Sufficient Funds or Credit and for Other Purposes."

6.Supra note 2.

7.Supra note 3.

8.Rollo, pp. 206-207.

9.Id. at 210.

10.Id. at 211-214.

11.See People v. Bayotas, G.R. No. 102007, September 2, 1994, 236 SCRA 239, 255-256.

12.Natividad Sta. Ana Victoria v. Republic of the Philippines, G.R. No. 179673, June 8, 2011; and People v. Flores, G.R. No. 106581, March 3, 1997, 269 SCRA 62, 66.