PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE

|

Search for www.chanrobles.com

Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila

FIRST DIVISION

ANTONIO CUTARAN, Complainant, vs. MUNICIPAL JUDGE SOLOMON VILLANUEVA, Ambaguio, Nueva Vizcaya, Respondent.chanrobles virtual law library

In an unsigned complaint dated September 30, 1972, Antonio Cutaran of Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya, charged Judge Solomon Villanueva of the Municipal Court of Ambaguio, Nueva Vizcaya, with being "always absent from (his) official station and yet received full salary every month." The complaint also included as respondents several other municipal judges, a fiscal and a BIR provincial officer charging them likewise with other alleged irregularities.chanrobles virtual law library

In his comment of January 3, 1973, respondent Judge Villanueva denied the accusation. He categorically stated that the complainant is nowhere to be found in Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya. According to him, even the postal employees of Bayombong tried hard to locate the complainant because there are three (3) letters of the Department of Justice addressed to him which are still undelivered. He also expired that complainant, in connection with the charge of "absenteeism" might be referring to the time when he was detailed for three months with the Court of First Instance of Nueva Vizcaya, Branch II, or during the rainy season when the mountain trails are impassable due to mountain slides and he had to hold office at a Sub- Office established at barrio Masok with the concurrence of other municipal officials. Respondent concluded that his service record and communications with the Department of Justice will bear out his travails and hardships.chanrobles virtual law library

We cannot give due course to this unverified complaint. It must be stressed that administrative complaints are accusatorial in nature, hence, they should be subscribed and sworn to and accompanied by such testimonial and/or documentary evidence as will evince respondent's culpability and thus bring him within the supervisory power of this Tribunal It appears that the charge is a mere conjecture, surmise or inference. Administrative charges against judge cannot be based on mere suspicion, surprise or inference. The complainant has the burden of proof and such proof must be solid, clear and convincing to compel the exercise of disciple power over the person indicted. Moreover, the comment of respondent Judge is satisfactory.chanrobles virtual law library

WHEREFORE, this administrative complaint against Municipal Judge Solomon Villanueva is dismissed for lack of merit.chanrobles virtual law library

SO ORDERED.