|
|
|
|
|
PEPITO
MAGNO,
G.
R.
No. L-19361
February
26, 1965
-versus-
HON. MACAPANTON ABBAS AND THE PROVINCIAL FISCAL OF DAVAO, Respondents. DIZON,
J :
In Criminal Case No. 285-A
filed with the Municipal Court of the City of Davao against Francisco
Nuñez
and others for robbery with rape, petitioner Pepito Magno was arrested
by virtue of a warrant of arrest issued by said Court. After proper
proceedings,
said Court forwarded the case to the Court of First Instance of Davao
where
it was docketed as Criminal Case No. 7155. Prior to the filing of the
Information
in the latter Court, petitioner filed a Motion for Bail, but the same
was
denied by the respondent judge on the ground that it was filed
prematurely.
A second Motion for Bail was filed subsequently by petitioner, and after a hearing held thereon, the respondent judge issued a verbal order on November 24, 1961 granting the motion and fixing the bail bond in the sum of P40,000.00. In the afternoon of the same date, however, the fiscal moved for a reconsideration of the Order claiming that he had just received sufficient evidence to prove the guilt of petitioner. The Court stayed the effectivity of the Order granting bail and after a hearing on the motion for reconsideration, the Order was finally set aside and another was issued denying the Motion for Bail. Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration of this last Order having been denied, he filed the present special civil action of certiorari, claiming that, in denying his Motion for Bail, the respondent judge committed grave abuse of discretion. In the Order of the respondent judge complained of, His Honor states the following:
"Guided by the above ruling, the Court is of the opinion that the accused shall be denied bail. He is accused of a capital offense. The evidence presented during the hearing of the petition for bail, without passing upon the merits of the evidence, shows that the accused Pepito Magno has participated in the commission of the offense of which he is charged with other persons. The least that can be said about the evidence on record, without passing on the merits, is that the proof of guilt of the accused is presumptively strong." It
is petitioner's contention
that while under the Constitution and the Rules of Court, a person
charged
with a capital offense may be denied bail before conviction only if the
evidence of guilt against him is strong, the respondent judge denied
him
bail only on the strength of a strong presumption of guilt, thereby
committing
a grave abuse of discretion.
Petitioner's contention is without merit. A reading of the Order complained of clearly shows that in the opinion of the respondent judge, the evidence presented during the summary hearing on the Motion for Bail showed "that the accused Pepito Magno has participated in the commission of the offense of which he is charged with other person". Casting aside unnecessary pronouncements made in the Order complained of, We believe that what the respondent judge really found and held was that the evidence of guilt presented against petitioner was strong and justified denial of his motion for bail. At this stage of the proceeding, there is nothing before Us sufficient to justify the conclusion that His Honor erred or abused his discretion in so holding. PREMISES CONSIDERED, the petition under consideration is dismissed and the writ prayed for denied, with costs. Bengzon, C.J.,
Bautista Angelo, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Paredes, Regala,
Makalintal,
Bengzon, J.P., and Zaldivar, JJ., concur.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|