I.
BARBERO vs. DUMLAO AM No. MTJ 07 1682 January 19, 2008
Complainant: Ester F. Barbero
Respondent : JUDGE CESAR M. DUMLAO, Municipal Trial Court, San Mateo, Isabela
Ponente :
FACTS
o
Ester F. Barbero (Barbero) filed a complaint for gross ignorance of the law filed against Judge Cesar
M. Dumlao (Judge Dumlao), Presiding Judge of the Municipal Trial Court, San Mateo, Isabela.
Barbero filed a criminal case1 for estafa against Herman A. Medina (Medina). The case was raffled to
Judge Anastacio D. Anghad (Judge Anghad), Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court (RTC),
Judicial Region II, Branch 36, Santiago City, Isabela. Judge Anghad issued a warrant of
arrest2 commanding the proper officer to arrest Medina.
Medina was arrested by virtue of the warrant of arrest. However, Judge Dumlao approved Medina's
bail and, on 9 May 2003, issued an order 3 commanding the Bureau of Jail Management and
Penology and the Philippine National Police to release Medina.
ISSUE
WoN respondent judge committed gross ignorance of the law.
HELD
The Court finds Judge Dumlao liable for gross ignorance of the law and for violation of Court directives.
The Court DISMISSES him from the service, with forfeiture of all benefits except accrued leave credits, and
with prejudice to reinstatement or appointment to any public office including government-owned or
controlled corporations.
Section 17(a), Rule 114 of the Rules of Court provides:
SEC. 17. Bail, where filed. - (a) Bail in the amount fixed may be filed with the court where the case is
pending, or in the absence or unavailability of the judge thereof, with any regional trial judge, metropolitan
trial judge, municipal trial judge, or municipal circuit trial judge in the province, city, or municipality. If the
accused is arrested in a province, city, or municipality other than where the case is pending, bail may also
be filed with any regional trial court of said place, or if no judge thereof is available, with any metropolitan
trial judge, municipal trial judge, or municipal circuit trial judge therein.
In Cruz v. Judge Yaneza,10 the Court held that:
There are prerequisites to be complied with. First, the application for bail must be filed in the court where
the case is pending. In the absence or unavailability of the judge thereof, the application for bail must be
filed with another branch of the same court within the province or city. Second, if the accused is
arrested in a province, city or municipality other than where the case is pending, bail may be filed with
any regional trial court of the place.
The criminal case Barbero filed against Medina was pending before the RTC of Santiago City. Judge Anghad
of the RTC issued the warrant of arrest, and Medina was arrested by virtue of that warrant.
Section 3, Rule 114 of the Rules of Court provides that no person under detention by legal process shall be
released except when he is admitted to bail. Section 19 provides that the accused must be discharged upon
approval of the bail by the judge with whom it was filed in accordance with Section 17. Section 17 provides
that the bail may be filed with the court where the case is pending, unless (1) the judge in that court is
absent or unavailable, or (2) the accused is arrested in a province, city, or municipality other than where the
case is pending. If the judge is absent or unavailable, the bail should be filed with another branch of the
same court. If the accused is arrested in a province, city, or municipality other than where the case is
pending, the bail should be filed with any RTC of the place.
There was no showing that Judge Anghad was absent or unavailable or that Medina was arrested outside
Santiago City. Thus, Medina's bail should have been filed with Judge Anghad. Even if Judge Anghad were
absent or unavailable or even if Medina were arrested in San Mateo, Judge Dumlao would still be liable
because the bail should have been filed with another branch of the RTC in Santiago City or with the RTC of
San Mateo, respectively.
Since the criminal case was pending before the RTC of Santiago City and there was no showing that Judge
Anghad of the RTC was absent or unavailable, Judge Dumlao lacked authority to approve the bail and order
Medina's release.
