Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1949 > September 1949 Decisions > G.R. No. L-3078 September 27, 1949 - JOSE P. BENGZON v. BUENAVENTURA OCAMPO, ET AL.

084 Phil 611:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-3078. September 27, 1949.]

JOSE P. BENGZON, Acting Commissioner of Immigration, Petitioner, v. BUENAVENTURA OCAMPO, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Manila, and MARIANO CHAN (alias ONG LIAN CHO), as an interested party, Respondents.

First Assistant Solicitor General Roberto A. Gianzon and Solicitor Lucas Lacson for Petitioner.

Yuseco, Abdon & Yuseco for Respondents.

SYLLABUS


1. ALIEN; DEPORTATION; STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION; BAIL NOT ALLOWED IN HABEAS CORPUS PENDING WITH COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE; SECTION 12 OF RULE 102, INTERPRETED. — According to section 12, Rule 102 of the Rules of Court, the judge in a habeas corpus proceeding must immediately proceed to hear and decide the case, unless for good cause shown the hearing is adjourned, in which event the court or judge shall make such order for the safekeeping of the person imprisoned or restrained as the nature of the case requires. The phrase "for the safekeeping of the person imprisoned or restrained" cannot be construed to mean temporary release on bail, because a person arrested or detained cannot be released on bail unless that right is granted by law. The word "safekeeping" means "the act or state of keeping or being kept in safety;" and a person arrested is not safely kept if released on bail.


D E C I S I O N


FERIA, J.:


The deportation of the respondent Mariano Chan alias Ong Lian Cho was, after the required investigation, ordered by the Bureau of Immigration for having maintained a house of prostitution. Pending the execution of the order of deportation, said respondent filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus with the Court of First Instance of Manila presided over by the other respondent Hon. Judge Ocampo; and during the pendency of the habeas corpus proceeding the respondent Judge Ocampo, upon motion of the other respondent above mentioned, ordered the provisional release of the latter under the condition that he should file a bond of P10,000 and report to the Bureau of Immigration on Monday, Wednesday and Saturday of every week.

The question involved in the present case is whether or not the respondent judge acted in excess of the court’s jurisdiction in granting the petition of the respondent Mariano Chan for his temporary release on bail during the pendency of the habeas corpus proceeding, instituted by him against the Commissioner of Immigration on the ground that the Bureau of Immigration has no power or jurisdiction to detain and order the deportation of the said Respondent.

The only legal provision which has some bearing on the question is section 12, Rule 102, of the Rules of Court which provides the following:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Hearing on return. Adjourments. — When the writ is returned before one judge, at a time when the court is in session, he may forthwith adjourn the case into the court, there to be heard and determined. The court or judge before whom the writ is returned or adjourned must immediately proceed to hear and examine the return, and such other matters as are properly submitted for consideration, unless for good cause shown the hearing is adjourned, in which event the court or judge shall make such order for the safekeeping of the person imprisoned or restrained as the nature of the case requires. . . ."cralaw virtua1aw library

According to the above-quoted provisions, the judge in a habeas corpus proceeding must immediately proceed to hear and decide the case, unless for good cause shown the hearing is adjourned, in which event the court or judge shall make such order for the safekeeping of the person imprisoned or restrained as the nature of the case requires. It is obvious that the phrase "for the safekeeping of the person imprisoned or restrained" can not be construed to mean temporary release on bail, because a person arrested or detained can not be released on bail unless that right is granted expressly by law, as the right of defendants in criminal cases to be released on bail under certain condition, as well as the right of a person, whose release has been ordered by judgment in a habeas corpus proceeding, to be temporarily released on bail if appeal is taken by the officer or person detaining, granted by section 20 of Rule 41, Rules of Court. On the contrary, the word "safekeeping" according to the dictionaries means "the act or state of keeping or being kept in safety." A person arrested is not safely kept if released on bail.

It is not necessary for us to determine, (a) whether the Commissioner of Immigration has authority to release an alien under bail or other conditions after the Board of Immigration has ordered his deportation as in the present case, although it seems that there is no provision of law expressly authorizing such release; and, (b) whether an alien under arrest in a deportation proceeding has the right to be released under reasonable bond or condition before the Bureau of Immigration has rendered its decision ordering his deportation, and therefore the courts of justice may, in a habeas corpus proceeding, grant his temporary release on bail if the Commissioner of Immigration refuses to grant or requires unreasonable bond or conditions for his release; because these are not now the questions submitted to us for decision.

In view of the foregoing, we hold that the respondent judge acted in excess of the jurisdiction of the court in releasing the defendant on bail during the pendency of the habeas corpus proceeding, and therefore the order complained of is set aside with costs against the respondent Mariano Chan. So ordered.

Moran, C.J., Ozaeta, Paras, Padilla, Tuason, Montemayor, Reyes and Torres, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






September-1949 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-2243 September 8, 1949 - ESTANISLAO FERMIN v. COURTS OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    084 Phil 539

  • G.R. No. L-1328 September 9, 1949 - MARIANO NEPOMUCENO, ET AL. v. EDILBERTO A. NARCISO, ET AL.

    084 Phil 542

  • G.R. No. L-1605 September 13, 1949 - APOLONIA JIMOGA-ON v. JULITA BELMONTE, ET AL.

    084 Phil 545

  • G.R. No. L-2296 September 14, 1949 - DOMINADOR LUCENA, ET AL. v. BIENVENIDO A. TAN

    084 Phil 548

  • G.R. No. L-1985 September 20, 1949 - RAFAELA G. CASTRO v. JOSE P. BENGZON, ET AL.

    084 Phil 552

  • G.R. No. L-1592 September 20, 1949 - MARY MCDONALD BACHRACH v. SOPHIE M. SEIFERT, ET AL.

    084 Phil 558

  • G.R. No. L-2721 September 20, 1949 - MANUEL EUGENIO v. Hon. BIENVENIDO A. TAN, ET AL.

    084 Phil 563

  • G.R. No. L-2804 September 20, 1949 - MANUEL EUGENIO v. JOSE TIANGCO

    084 Phil 565

  • G.R. No. L-961 September 21, 1949 - BLANDINA GAMBOA HILADO v. JOSE GUTIERREZ DAVID, ET AL.

    084 Phil 569

  • G.R. No. L-3053 September 21, 1949 - NUMENCIANO BRACA, ET AL. v. BIENVENIDO TAN, ET AL.

    084 Phil 582

  • G.R. No. L-7777 September 23, 1949 - FELIPE UNTAL v. CHIEF OF STAFF, AFP, ET AL.

    084 Phil 586

  • G.R. No. L-1662 September 27, 1949 - BACOLOD-MURCIA PLANTER’S ASS’N. v. VICENTE CHUA

    084 Phil 596

  • G.R. No. L-1781 September 27, 1949 - REGISTER OF DEEDS OF PAMPANGA, ET AL. v. PNB, ET AL.

    084 Phil 600

  • G.R. No. L-1786 September 27, 1949 - JOAQUIN HERRERIAS v. ROQUE JAVELLANA

    084 Phil 608

  • G.R. No. L-3078 September 27, 1949 - JOSE P. BENGZON v. BUENAVENTURA OCAMPO, ET AL.

    084 Phil 611

  • G.R. No. L-2357 September 28, 1949 - BIBIANA T. VDA. DE INFANTE, ET AL. v. RUPERTO JAVIER, ET AL.

    084 Phil 614

  • G.R. No. L-3346 (CA-No. 3121-R) September 29, 1949 - RICHARD BRESLIN v. LUZON STEVEDORING COMPANY

    084 Phil 618

  • Adm. No. 35 September 30, 1949 - IN RE: Atty. FELIX P. DAVID

    084 Phil 627

  • G.R. No. L-822 September 30, 1949 - POTENCIANO ILUSORIO, ET AL. v. FERNANDO BUSUEGO

    084 Phil 630

  • G.R. No. L-1696 September 30, 1949 - ANACLETO DE ALMEDA, ET AL. v. ADRIANO F. CRUZ

    084 Phil 636

  • G.R. No. L-1799 September 30, 1949 - INDALECIO ELAGO v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

    084 Phil 643

  • G.R. No. L-1802 September 30, 1949 - TORIBIO REYES v. CALTEX (PHILIPPINES) INC.

    084 Phil 654

  • G.R. No. L-2162 September 30, 1949 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BENITO TUASON

    084 Phil 670

  • G.R. No. L-2422 September 30, 1949 - MARCELO ENRIQUEZ v. HIGINIO B. MACADAEG, ET AL.

    084 Phil 674

  • G.R. No. 48177 September 30, 1949 - MERCEDES D. VALBUENA, ET AL. v. AURELIO REYES, ET AL.

    084 Phil 676