Republic of the Philippines
Department of Justice
NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE
OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR
QUEZON CITY
BICOL ISAROG TRANSPORT SYSTEMS INC.
Rep. By: JOSE H. AFALLA
Complainant,
I.S.
-versus- For: Qualified Theft
MARK ANTHONY ORAY
Respondent.
x------------------x
COMPLAINT – AFFIDAVIT
I, JOSE H. AFALLA, of legal age, married, Filipino, with
principal office address at Cu Un Tong Building, Concepcion
Grande, Naga City, Philippines, after having been duly sworn
in accordance with law, do hereby depose and state that:
1. I am the Authorized Representative of PEÑAFRANCIA
TOURS AND TRAVEL TRANSPORT INC., a Corporation
duly organized and existing under the law of the
Philippines, with office address at Cu Un Tong Building,
Concepcion Grade, Naga City, Philippines. Attached and
made an integral part of this complaint-affidavit is a copy
of Secretary Certificate marked as Annex “A”.
2. Respondent MARK ANTHONY ORAY, of legal age, single,
Filipino and with residence at _______________,
PHILIPPINES, where he may be served with subpoena
and other processes of this Honorable Office.
3. In the regular course of business of the complainant, the
latter hired the services of MARK ANTHONY ORAY,
referred hereto as “Respondent”, as its Driver of the
Peñafrancia Tours and Travel Transport Inc. located at
Cu Un Tong Building, Concepcion Grande, Naga City,
whose primary function involves the following:
The position shall be assigned to sell, offer company
tickets, cargo services and other products to walk-in and
online customer queries over the phone and at the
terminal / booking where assigned. Provide daily sales
reports on all transactions done for the day. Must adhere
to all company policies, regulations as well as all
company rules pertaining but not limited to passenger
ticketing and sales, cargo handling and cargo sales
operations. Attached and made an integral part of this
complaint-affidavit is a copy of the Employment Contract
of the respondent marked as Annex "B".
4. As mentioned above, part of the functions of the
respondent is to provide daily sales reports on all
transactions done for the day. On April 25, 2024, herein
respondent Oray was instructed to the deposit the daily
sales report and cash sales of the Polangui Ticketing
Booth to the Naga Main Office located at Cu Un Tong
Building, Concepcion Grande. However, respondent failed
to surrender said sales report and cash sales amounting
to THRITY SIX THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED TEN
PESOS (P 36,410.00).
5. On May 3, 2023, the Accounting Department made an
INCIDENT REPORT regarding the matter. Attached and
made an integral part of this complaint-affidavit marked
as Annex “C”.
6. Hence, On May 4, 2024, the incident was reported to the
Legal Department and had the respondent counselled
and made his written explanation. Attached and made an
integral part of this complaint-affidavit marked as
Annexes “D” and “D-1”.
7. The Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, under Article
308, laid down the elements of the crime of Simple Theft,
they are as follows 1. That there be taking of personal
property, 2. That the said property belongs to another; 3.
That the taking be done with intent to gain; 4. That the
taking be done without the consent of the owner; and 5.
That the taking be done without the use of violence
against or intimidation of persons or force upon things.
(Emphasis supplied)
8. Theft is qualified under Article 310 of the same Code
when the following elements are present: 1. Theft is
committed by a domestic servant; 2. Theft is committed
with grave abuse of confidence, 3. The property taken is
either a motor vehicle, mail matter or large cattle; 4. The
property consists of coconut taken from the plantation; 5.
The property stolen is fish from the pond or fishery; and
6. The property was taken on the occasion of fire,
earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, and among
others. (Emphasis supplied).
9. Given the foregoing, the mere taking of the property of
another with intent to gain constitutes the crime of theft
and when coupled with abuse of trust and confidence the
crime is qualified theft.
10. Here, the fact that the respondent is in a position that
enjoys the confidence of the complainant, his act of
taking the subject amount of money with intent to gain,
qualified his act.
11. Moreover, the recovery of a part of the subject amount is
in no way removes the act of the defendant from the
ambit of qualified theft. What is material is the taking of
the property of another with intent to gain and abuse of
confidence. The Supreme Court has held in the case of
Anita Miranda versus the People of the Philippines to
wit:
Here, the prosecution was able to prove
beyond reasonable doubt that the amount
of P797,187.85 taken does not belong to
petitioner but to VCCI and that petitioner
took it without VCCI's consent and with
grave abuse of confidence by taking
advantage of her position as accountant
and bookkeeper. The prosecution's evidence
proved that petitioner was entrusted with
checks payable to VCCI or Viva by virtue of
her position as accountant and bookkeeper.
12. In addition, in the case of People of the Philippines
versus Ruben Sison the Supreme Court elucidated on
the peculiarities of the crime of Qualified Theft, to wit:
The crime perpetuated by appellant against
his employer, the Philippine Commercial
and Industrial Bank (PCIB), is qualified
theft. Appellant could not have committed
the crime had he not been holding the
position of Luneta Branch Operation Officer
which gave him not only sole access to the
bank vault but also control of the access of
all bank employees in that branch, except
the Branch Manager, to confidential and
highly delicate computerized security
systems designed to safeguard, among
others, the integrity of telegraphic fund
transfers and account names of bank
clients. The management of the PCIB
reposed its trust and confidence in the
appellant Datamata Bramption Officer, and
it was this trust and confidence which he
exploited to enrich himself to the damage
and prejudice of PCIB in the amount of
P6,000,000.00.
13. I have executed this complaint-affidavit to attest to
the truth of the foregoing and to initiate a complaint
against Respondent MARK ANTHONY ORAY for
Qualified Theft, and / or such other offenses in the
Revised Penal Code which this Honorable Office may
deem appropriate after the conduct of Preliminary
Investigation.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this
_______________ of _______________ at ____________________.
JOSE H. AFALLA
Affiant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME on this
______________________ at ______________, Philippines. I further
certify that I have personally examined the affiant and I am
satisfied that he voluntarily executed and understood the
foregoing Complaint-Affidavit.
NOTARY
PUBLIC
Doc. No. _____
Page No. _____
Book No. ____
Series of 2024.
