The private complainant in a criminal case cannot question the grant of bail and acquittal in favor of the accused.
This was reiterated by the Supreme Court’s Second Division, in a Decision penned by Associate Justice Mario V. Lopez, as it affirmed the grant of bail and the subsequent acquittal of Emmanuel D. Pascual (Pascual).
Pascual was charged with three counts of qualified theft under Article 10 of the Revised Penal Code for allegedly stealing money from PASDA, Inc. (PASDA) by issuing company checks under his name and pocketing the proceeds. Pascual was a former President of PASDA and, at the time of the alleged incident, then a member of its Board of Directors.
The Regional Trial Court found Pascual guilty. At the Court of Appeals (CA), Pascual filed a petition for bail pending his appeal, which the CA granted, ordering his provisional release. This was challenged by PASDA, the private complainant in the case.
The CA later acquitted Pascual of the charges, finding that he was duly authorized, as evidenced by a Board Resolution, to issue and withdraw the checks on behalf of PASDA.
PASDA filed before the Supreme Court a Petition for Certiorari questioning the CA’s grant of bail and judgment of acquittal. The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), however, sought the dismissal of PASDA’s petition for lack of legal standing to question the criminal aspect of the case.
The Supreme Court denied PASDA’s petition, reiterating its ruling in the 2022 case of Austria v. AAA that a private complainant in a criminal case has the legal standing to assail the civil liability of the accused but not the criminal aspect of the case, unless made with the OSG’s conformity.
In this case, PASDA was questioning the CA’s grant of bail pending appeal and its judgment of acquittal. These matters involve the criminal aspect of the case, which only the OSG may bring or defend on behalf of the State, as the party affected in a criminal case.
The interest of the private complainant, on the other hand, is restricted only to the civil liability of the accused.
Thus, without the OSG’s conformity, PASDA had no legal standing to question the grant of bail in favor of Pascual nor his acquittal. (Courtesy of the Supreme Court Public Information Office)
Full text of G.R. No. 264237, PASDA, Inc. v. Court of Appeals and Pascual (December 6, 2023) at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/264237-pasda-inc-vs-court-of-appeals-and-emmanuel-d-pascual/