HILARIO P. P. SORIANO and ROSALINDA ILAGAN, petitioners, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, BANGKO SENTRAL NG PILIPINAS (BSP, and PHILIPPINE DEPO DEPOSI SIT T INS! INS!RA RAN" N"E E "ORP "ORPOR ORA ATION TION (PDI (PDI" ",, resp respon onde dent nts. s. G.R. G.R. Nos. Nos. #$%$#&'#. )*ne +, -%.
Motion to Quash; The fundamental test in considering a motion to quash anchored on Section 3(a), Rule 117 of the 19! Rules on "riminal #rocedure, #rocedure, is the su$cienc% of the the a&er a&erme ment nts s in the the info inforrmati mation on;; that that is, is, 'het 'hethe herr the the fact facts s alle allege ged, d, if h%otheti h%otheticall call% % admitted admitted,, 'ould 'ould estalis estalish h the essentia essentiall elements elements of the o*ense o*ense charged as de+ned % la' -acts that constitute the defense of the etitioners against the charge under the information must e ro&ed % them during trial Such facts or circumstances do not constitute roer grounds for a motion to quash the infor informa matio tion n on the groun ground d that that the materi material al a&erm a&erment ents s do not consti constitut tute e the o*ense Fa/ts. Soriano and /lagan 'ere the #resident and 0eneral Manager, resecti&el%, of
the Rural an2 of San Miguel (ulacan), /nc (RSM) llegedl%, on 4une 57, 1997 and ugust 51, 1997, during their incumenc% as resident and manager of the an2, an2, etit etition ioners ers indir indirect ectl% l% otain otained ed loans loans from from RSM RSM The% The% falsi+ falsi+ed ed the loan loan alications and other an2 records, and made it aear that 6irgilio 4 Malang and Rogelio Maaol otained loans of #1!M each, 'hen in fact the% did not The rosecutor rosecutor charged Soriano in the RT" 'ith &iolation of Section 3 of R R 8o 337 or the 0eneral an2ing an2ing ct, as amended amended or 6iolation 6iolation of the irector, irector, :$cer, Stoc2holder or Related /nterest (:SR/) Rules (:SR/ Rules) n information for estafa thru falsi+cation of commercial document 'as also +led against Soriano and /lagan #etitioners mo&ed to quash the informations arguing that the rosecutor charged more than one o*ense for a single act Soriano 'as charged 'ith &iolation of :SR/ rules and estafa thru falsi+cation of commercial document for allegedl% securing +ctitious loans The% further argued that the facts as alleged in the information do not constitute an o*ense RT" denied the motion to quash " sustained the denial of etitioners searate motions to quash Iss*e0
/n =one% & #eole, this "ourt, in uholding the +ling of multile charges against the accused, held. >s earl% as the start of the last centur%, this "ourt had ruled that a single act or incident might o*end against t'o or more entirel% distinct and unrelated ro&isions of la' thus ?ustif%ing the rosecution of the accused for more than one o*ense The onl% limit to this rule is the "onstitutional rohiition that no erson shall e t'ice ut in ?eoard% of unishment for >the same o*ense@ /n #eole & oriqueA, 'e held that t'o (or more) o*enses arising from the same act are not >the same@B C C C if one ro&ision Dof la'E requires roof of an additional fact or element 'hich the other does not, C C C #hrased else'ise, 'here t'o di*erent la's (or articles of
the same code) de+ne t'o crimes, rior ?eoard% as to one of them is no ostacle to a rosecution of the other, although oth o*enses arise from the same facts, if each crime in&ol&es some imortant act 'hich is not an essential element of the other /n this case, ho'e&er, Soriano 'as faced not 'ith one information charging more than one o*ense, ut 'ith more than one information, each charging a di*erent o*enseB&iolation of :SR/ rules in one, and estafa thru falsi+cation of commercial documents in the others /lagan, on the other hand, 'as charged 'ith estafa thru falsi+cation of commercial documents in searate informations Thus, etitioners erroneousl% in&o2e dulicit% of charges as a ground to quash the /nformations The fundamental test in considering a motion to quash anchored on Section 3(a), Rule 117 of the 19! Rules on "riminal #rocedure, is the su$cienc% of the a&erments in the information; that is, 'hether the facts alleged, if h%otheticall% admitted, 'ould estalish the essential elements of the o*ense charged as de+ned % la'