G.R. No. 109271 - RICARDO CASTILLO, DEMETRIO CABISON JR., AND RODOLFO AGDEPPA, VS. HONORABLE SANDIGANBAYAN (SECOND DIVISION), AND PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY HONORABLE CONRADO VASQUEZ, OMBUDSMAN.DECISION - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

accordingly recommended the filing of an Information against them for violation of Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019). [4] On November 27, 1987, petitioners promptly filed a Motion for Reinvestigation. [5] On March 21, 1988, they filed a Motion to Resolve their Motion for Reinvestigation. [6] Without acting upon the Motion for Reinvestigation and Motion to Resolve Motion for Reinvestigation, an Information was filed on November 5, 1990, before the Sandiganbayan, which reads: "That on or about August 5, 1986 or prior and subsequent thereto, in Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, accused namely, Ricardo R. Castillo, Rodolfo M. Agdeppa and Demetrio M. Cabison Jr., all public officers being then COA Auditor VIII, COA Auditor II and COA Auditor III, respectively, taking advantage of their official positions, while in the performance or discharge of their administrative official functions, with evident bad faith and manifest partiality, conspiring, confederating and confabulating with each other, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and fraudulently cause undue injury, damage and prejudice to the Government of the Republic of the Philippines, to wit: that two contracts were entered into by the NHA management with two private contractors relative to the complete development of Phase V-A Packages 3 & 4 which is being constructed by Sarmiento Construction Co., and likewise Phase IX Packages 7 & 7-A which is being constructed by the Supra Construction Co., both constructions are located at the Tala Estate Sites & Services, by causing to prepare, submit, issue and sign in the different inventory reports/recommendation on various occasions that Sarmiento Construction had an overpayment in the amount of P362,591.98 for Phase V-A Packages 3 & 4 but later on said accused changed their inventory reports/recommendation and subsequently readjusted this as overpayment on physical work thereby prejudicing the government on account of accused's constant changes/reversals in the inventory reports prepared, signed and submitted by them; whereas in the second contract with Supra Construction, accused issued an inventory report by stating thereon that said contractor had a work deficiency in the amount of P788,806.94 but refraining from taking appropriate action on account of P1,873,091.40 withheld on Tala to pay a refund order on a Tondo contract issued by the COA main office. The said accused raised the deficiency in the amount of P855,281.50. Later on, another inventory report was issued and prepared by a Tri-Partite Team Committee composed of COA, NHA and the contractors stating a work deficiency in the amount of P352,121.40 only. Despite previous inventory reports/recommendation by the accused citing different amounts and another amount by the Tri-Partite Team Committee said accused later stated that the final deficiencies of Supra Construction is no longer P855,281.58 but wa