Hector Treñas, vs. People of the Philippines

G. R. No. 195002, January 25, 2012; per Sereno, J.

Facts

The Information filed by the Office of the City Prosecutor before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) stated that herein accused-appellant received in trust from Elizabeth Luciaja the amount of P150,000.00 which money was given to her by her aunt Margarita Alocilja, with the express obligation on the part of the accused to use the said amount for expenses and fees in connection with the purchase of a parcel of land covered by TCT No. T-109266. Once in possession of the said amount, the accused-appellant, with the intent to gain and abuse of confidence, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously misappropriate, misapply and convert to his own personal use and benefit the amount of P130,000.00 less attorney’s fees.

The RTC rendered a Decision finding petitioner guilty of the crime of Estafa under section 1, paragraph (b), of Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC).

Issue

Whether or not the accused has to present evidence in support of the defense of lack of jurisdiction even if such lack of jurisdiction appears in the evidence of the prosecution

Ruling

The Supreme Court ruled that there being no showing that the offense was committed within Makati, the RTC of that city has no jurisdiction over the case. The prosecution failed to show that the offense of estafa under Section 1, paragraph (b) of Article 315 of the RPC was committed within the jurisdiction of the RTC of Makati City. Although the prosecution alleged that the check issued by petitioner was dishonored in a bank in Makati, such dishonor is not an element of the offense charged in the present case.

It has been consistently held by this Court that it is unfair to require a defendant or accused to undergo the ordeal and expense of a trial if the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter or offense or it is not the court of proper venue. Section 15 (a) of Rule 110 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure of 2000 provides that "subject to existing laws, the criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court of the municipality or territory where the offense was committed or where any of its essential ingredients occurred."