G.R. No. 193250 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK, VS. AMELIO TRIA AND JOHN DOE.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, Undersigned respectfully recommends the approval of the above and the dismissal of the charge for Qualified Theft against respondent Amelio C. Tria due to lack of evidence and probable cause. PNB moved for reconsideration but was denied in a Resolution [28] dated April 13, 2007. Undaunted, PNB filed a petition for review with the Department of Justice (DOJ) and prayed for the reversal of the August 15, 2006 and April 13, 2007 Resolutions issued by the Office of the City Prosecutor of Quezon City (OCP). On December 26, 2007, then Justice Secretary Raul M. Gonzales issued a Resolution dismissing PNBs petition for review. PNBs motion for reconsideration was denied in a Resolution dated February 27, 2009. PNB sought recourse before the Court of Appeals (CA). It alleged that both the OCP and the DOJ committed grave abuse of discretion in failing to consider that Tria and Atty. Reyes/John Doe conspired in committing the crime of qualified theft; and the DOJ committed grave abuse of discretion in failing to consider the existence of probable cause in the instant case and affirming the OCPs findings that there is no probable cause to hold Tria and Atty. Reyes/John Doe for trial in the crime of qualified theft. The Ruling of the CA On January 18, 2010, the CA decided in favor of Tria. In affirming the DOJ Resolution issued by Secretary Gonzales, the CA took notice of how Managers Check No. 1165848 was issued and paid by PNB after the verification made by PNBs own employees. The CA ruled that probable cause against Tria and Atty. Reyes was not established since the employees of PNB made the encashment after their own independent verification of C/A No. 244-850099-6. Further, the CA deferred to the DOJs determination of probable cause for the filing of an information in court as it is an executive function and ruled that the resolutions were not reversible as PNB was unable to show that these resolutions of the DOJ were tainted with grave abuse of discretion. The CA, thus, affirmed the OCPs finding that Trias identification of the payee did not by itself bring about the payment of the subject managers check and concluded that the element of taking of personal property belonging to another without the owners consent is lacking since PNB consented to the taking by Atty. Reyes. The dispositive portion of the CA Decision reads: WHEREFORE, the petition is DISMISSED. The assailed Resolutions dated December 26, 2007 and February 29, 2009, issued by Justice Secretary Raul M. Gonzales in I.S. No. 05-10093. are AFFIRMED. SO ORDERED.