The People of the Philippines vs.

Kong Leon
G.R. No. 3906-R | January 17, 1950
Labrador, J.:

Facts: Police received information from a certain Moro Arais Mansu that Kong Leon is selling
illegally fabricated United States Gold Coins. The police then acquired a search warrant to
which they sent Moro in advance to stall Kong. Police found unfinished gold coins within Kong’s
shop and clothing to which he admitted that he made such coins. In defense, he stated that the
gold coins are out of circulation in virtue of the United States Gold Reserve Act of 1934 and that
prevailing US and English jurisprudence does not punish fabricating or counterfeiting coins out
of circulation.

Issue: Whether or not counterfeiting coins which are out of circulation is punishable.

Held: Yes. While the Court does not deny the existence of the US and English jurisprudence
not punishing such act, however they deem that this case must be seen as different. What is
present in this case is the fact that the circulation of such coins, even out of circulation, as a
means of trade and business of Kong Leon, that in the long run may lead to Kong Leon’s
production of in circulation coins, and the out of circulation coins be still used to defraud people.
The US Gold Reserve Act did not actually place the coin out of circulation permanently, but
rather it only suspended the production. Hence, the danger that these coins are used further,
and eventually may be placed back in circulation, increases the possibility that the coins be
used in an illegal manner.
 SERGIO DEL ROSARIO vs. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. L-16806 | December 22, 1961.
Concepcion, J.

Facts: Accused of counterfeiting Philippine treasury notes, Sergio del Rosario, Alfonso Araneta
and Benedicto del Pilar were convicted of illegal possession of said forged treasury notes. After
showing to complainant Apolinario del Rosario the Philippine one-peso bills and the Philippine
two-peso bill, and inducing him to believe that the same were counterfeit paper money
manufactured by them, although in fact they were genuine treasury notes of the Philippine
Government one of the digits of each of which had been altered and changed, the defendants
had succeeded in obtaining P1,700.00 from said complainant for the avowed purpose of
financing the manufacture of more counterfeit treasury notes of the Philippines.

Issue: Whether or not the possession of said bills constitutes a violation of Article 168 of the
Revised Penal Code

Held: Yes. The possession of genuine treasury notes of the Philippines any of "the figures,
letters, words or signs contained" in which had been erased and/or altered, with knowledge of
such erasure and alteration, and with the intent to use such notes, as they were used by
petitioner herein and his co-defendants in the manner adverted to above, is punishable under
said Article 168, in relations to Article 166 of the Revised Penal Code. It is not disputed that a
portion of the last digit 9 of the serial numbers in said bills had been erased and changed so as
to read 0. Hence, there is a violation of Article 168 of the Revised Penal Code.
 The People of the Philippines vs. Benjamin Galano y Carpio
G.R. No. 18701-R | December 2, 1957
De Leon, J.

Facts: Defendant Benjamin Galano y Carpio bought from one Lilia Cruz four balut eggs and
paid her a false pre-war one-peso bill of the Treasury Certificate series. Upon receiving the one-
peso bill from Galano, Cruz discovered that the word “Victory” at the back thereof was only
written in ink. Thereupon, she called Galano but the latter started to run away. The one-peso
paper bill is a genuine pre-war treasury certificate “payable to the bearer on demand” which has
been, however, withdrawn from circulation. It is, however, redeemable at its face value if
presented to the Central Bank, pursuant to Republic Acts Nos. 17 and 199. Galano was
charged and convicted with a violation of Article 166 of the Revised Penal Code in relation to
Article 169.

Issue: Whether or not defendant has correctly been convicted of forgery under Article 169 of
the Revised Penal Code

Held: Yes. Forgery may be committed by any of the following means: 1) By giving to a treasury
or bank note or any instrument payable to bearer or to order mentioned therein, the appearance
of a true and genuine document; and 2) By erasing substituting, counterfeiting or altering by any
means the figures, letters or signs contained therein. The forgery here committed comes under
the first paragraph of Article 169 of the Code. This provision does not only contemplate
situations where a spurious, false or fake document or instrument is given the appearance of a
true and genuine document, but also to situations involving originally true and genuine
documents which have been withdrawn or demonetized, or outlived their usefulness.
 The People of the Philippine Islands vs. Estela Romualdez and Luis Mabunay
G.R. No. 31012 | September 10, 1932
Vickers, J.

Facts: Justice Norberto Romualdez was the chairman of the committee for the 1926 bar
examinations. Luis Mabunay, one of the candidates, got an average of 75% but his grades for
two subjects were changed. Estela Romualdez, Justice Romualdez’s secretary, admitted
changing the grade as she was allegedly given authority to correct the grade although Mabunay
called Estela a few days before the publication of the results.

Issue: Whether or not defendants are guilty of falsification

Held: Yes. Falsification of a document may be done by causing it to appear that persons have
participated in any act; by attributing to persons who have participated in an act statements they
did not make; and by making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which
change its meaning. Estela’s act of altering the grades as if corrections did so make her guilty of
the crime. Mabunay, by calling Estela, is a co-principal. Hence, both are guilty of falsification.
 Salud P. Beradio vs. The Court of Appeals and People of the Philippines
G.R. Nos. L-49483-86 | March 30, 1981
De Castro, J.

Facts: On particular dates, Salud Beradio an election registrar of the COMELEC in Rosales,
Pangasinan, reported her attendance in office and actual hours of work performed even if she
actually attended hearings on those dates. She was convicted of the crime of falsification of
public or official documents.

Issue: Whether or not Beradio is guilty of falsification of public or official documents

Held: No. The elements of falsification are that 1) the offender makes in a document false
statements in a narration of facts; 2) he has a legal obligation to disclose the truth of the facts
narrated by him; 3) the facts narrated by him are absolutely fake and 4) the perversion of truth in
the narration of facts was made with the wrongful intent of injuring a third person. In this case,
Beradio is not under strict obligation to keep and submit a time record and she did not have any
wrongful intent. Hence, she is not guilty of the crime charged.
 Pilar S. Luague vs. The Honorable Court of Appeals and People of the Philippines
G.R. Nos. L-55683 & 55903-04 | February 22, 1982
Abad Santos, J.

Facts: Iluminado Luague, a teacher clerk died. Thereafter, the deceased's salary warrants was
forwarded to Florencio Guillermo who signed the payroll-warrant registers certifying that each
employee whose name appeared on the rolls had received the salary warrant indicated opposite
his name. Guillermo claimed that upon discovering his mistake, he asked petitioner Pilar
Luague to return the treasury warrants issued in the name of her husband Illuminado and that
petitioner promised to do so but actually did not. Guillermo discovered that the treasury warrants
had been encashed by petitioner to pay debts incurred for the illness and death of Iluminado.
Petitioner was charged with three counts of estafa thru falsification of document but was
convicted of falsification only. Pilar contends that she acted in good faith or had no criminal
intent when she cashed Iluminado’s paychecks.

Issue: Whether or not petitioner is guilty of estafa thru falsification of commercial documents

Held: No. Petitioner signed her husband’s name to the checks because they were delivered to
her by no less than Iluminado’s district supervisor long after Iluminado’s death which was known
to the supervisor. She used the proceeds of the checks to pay for the expenses of Iluminado’s
illness and his burial and she believed that she was entitled to the money as an advance
payment for her husband’s vacation and sick leave credits. There was also no damage incurred
against the government as the deceased employee deserved the salary his wife availed of.
Even if there was falsification when she signed for Iluminado, this was done with the knowledge
of Iluminado’s supervisor that the husband was indeed dead.
 DARIO CABIGAS vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. L-67472 | July 3, 1987.
Paras, J.

Facts: Dario Cabigas and Benedicto Reynes both work in the Securities Section of the Land
Bank of the Philippines. They discovered the loss of six treasury bills. Reyes crossed out with a
red ink in the said document the last two digits "82" and the addition after them of the figure "76"
on the serial numbers. Cabigas prepared his own report where he placed the notation
"Adjustment on Erroneous Entry (incoming) dated March 9, 1982" as legend of the asterisk (*)
sign which appears after the figure "1,533." Upon discovery of this, both were charged with
falsification on two counts. Reynes was acquitted in both but Cabigas was only acquitted in one.

Issue: Whether or not Cabigas should be acquitted

Held: Yes. The elements of falsification under par. No. 4 of Article 171 are not present in the
case at bar. The correction of the figure to conform to the actual number of treasury under
custody is not falsification because it was made to speak the truth. The placing of an asterisk (*)
sign and writing the words was not effected to hide or conceal the fact that the missing 6
treasury bills were lost. Immediately upon discovery of the loss, petitioner reported the matter to
his immediate supervisor. This shows good faith and lack of motive on the part of petitioner to
conceal the said loss. Petitioner was also not under "legal obligation" to disclose in the DR
SDUC or SDR the correct number and total maturity value of the securities under their official
custody as of a given date. Hence, he should be acquitted.
 The People of the Philippines vs. Licerio P. Sendaydiego, et al.
G.R. Nos. L-33252-54 | January 20, 1978
Aquino, J.

Facts: Licerio P. Sendaydiego, provincial treasurer of Pangasinan, in conspiracy with Juan

Samson, as an employee of a lumber store, and with Anastacio Quirimit, the provincial auditor
as an accompliance, used six forged provincial vouchers to embezzle from the road and bridge
fund the total sum of P57,048.23. They were charged with malversation through falsification.
After trial the lower court acquitted the auditor and found Sendaydiego and Samson guilty as
principals of malversation through falsification of public documents. Pending appeal,
Sendaydiego died. His criminal liability was dismissed but his civil liability was still to be
determined. 

Issue: Whether or not the crime committed by the co-accused was a complex crime 

Held: No. The crime committed are not complex, but separate crimes of falsification and
malversation; because in the six vouchers the falsification was used to conceal the
malversation. Each falsification and each malversation constituted independent offenses which
must be punished separately. Since Samson, a private person, conspired with an accountable
public officer in committing malversation, he is also guilty of malversation. Samson and the
estate of the late Sandaydiego were held solidarily liable to indemnify the province of
Pangasinan.
 Manuel L. Siquian vs. The People of the Philippines and The Court of Appeals
G.R. No. 82197 | March 13, 1989
Cortes, J.

Facts: Jesusa Carreon went to defendant Manuel L. Siquian, Mayor of Angadanan, Isabela, to
apply for employment. She was appointed clerk to the Municipal Secretary in the Office of the.
Accompanying her appointment is the certification of the availability of funds (C.S. Form No.
203) issued by Siquian, pursuant to the requirements of Memorandum Circular No. 5, Series of
1975, addressed to the Commissioner of Civil Service. Siquian was charged with the crime of
falsification of public document under Art. 171, p. 4 of the RPC for the documents related to
Carreon’s appointment. 

Issue: Whether or not Siquian is guilty of the crime of falsification of public document

Held: Yes.  All of the requisites for the offense had been fully met in the case at bar. Petitioner,
a public officer, made an untruthful statement in the narration of facts contained in the
certification which he issued in connection with the appointment of Jesusa. It is immaterial
whether or not the Civil Service Commissioner to whom the certification was addressed
received the document issued by petitioner. Since the certification was prepared by petitioner in
accordance with the standard forms prescribed by the government pursuant to law, the
certification was invested with the character of a public document, falsification of which is
punishable under Article 171 of the Revised Penal Code. Here, falsification of such document
was committed when the petitioner stated that funds were available for the position to which
Jesusa was appointed when he knew that, in reality, the position itself did not even exist and no
funds had been appropriated therefor.
 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. HON. FELICIDAD CARANDANG VILLALON and
FEDERICO DE GUZMAN
G.R. No. 43659 | December 21, 1990.
Regalado, J.

Facts: Mariano Carrera executed a special power of attorney naming private respondent
Federico de Guzman as his lawful attorney-in-fact. De Guzman then mortgaged complainant’s
parcel of land and was able to obtain the amount of P8,500.00 as a loan. After the expiration of
the term of the mortgage, and the mortgage account not having been paid, the mortgagee bank
foreclosed said mortgage and the land was sold. Complainant discovered that the property was
already registered in the name of the buyers. A criminal case of estafa thru falsification of a
public document was filed against De Guzman.

Issue: Whether or not the charge of estafa thru falsification of a public document has sufficient
basis to exist in fact and in law

Held: Yes. The falsification of a public document may be a means of committing estafa because
before the falsified document is actually utilized to defraud another, the crime of falsification has
already been consummated, damage or intent to cause damage not being an element of the
crime of falsification of public, official or commercial documents. The damage to another is
caused by the commission of estafa, not by the falsification of the document, hence, the
falsification of the public, official or commercial document is only a necessary means to commit
the estafa. In the case at bar, it is clear that what was intended was an authority to mortgage
only the one-half portion of the property. Since De Guzman mortgaged the whole property using
the authority given to him, the charge has sufficient basis to exist in fact and in law.
 Agustina M. Enemecio vs. Office of the Ombudsman and Servando Bernante
G.R. No. 146731 | January 13, 2004
Carpio, J.

Facts: Petitioner Agustina M. Enemecio filed an administrative complaint and a criminal

complaint against Servando Bernante for falsification of public document with the Office of the
Ombudsman. Enemecio asserted that Bernante made it appear in his leave application that he
was on forced leave and on vacation leave while serving in prison. Bernante was able to receive
his salary during his incarceration. Enemecio contended that Bernante was not entitled to
receive salary for that period because of his “falsified leave applications.” The Ombudsman
dismissed both complaints.

Issue: Whether or not Bernante may be convicted of the crime of falsification of public
document

Held: No. Under Article 171, paragraph 4 of the Revised Penal Code, the elements of
falsification of public documents through an untruthful narration of facts are: (1) the offender
makes in a document untruthful statements in a narration of facts; (b) the offender has a legal
obligation to disclose the truth of the facts narrated; (c) the facts narrated by the offender are
absolutely false; and (d) the perversion of truth in the narration of facts was made with the
wrongful intent to injure a third person. Enemecio failed to point to any law imposing upon
Bernante the legal obligation to disclose where he was going to spend his leave of absence.
“Legal obligation” means that there is a law requiring the disclosure of the truth of the facts
narrated. Bernante may not be convicted of the crime of falsification of public document by
making false statements in a narration of facts absent any legal obligation to disclose where he
would spend his vacation leave and forced leave.
 Leonila Batulanon vs. People of the Philippines
G.R. No. 139857 | September 15, 2006
Ynares-Santiago, J.

Facts: Complainant PCCI employed Leonila Batulanon as its cashier/manager in charge of

receiving deposits from and releasing loans to the members of the cooperative. During an audit,
certain irregularities concerning the release of loans were discovered. Four informations for
estafa thru falsification of commercial documents were filed against Batulanon. During trial, a
witness testified that Batulanon signed names of non-PCCI members as payees and recipients
of cash vouchers.

Issue: Whether or not Batulanon is guilty of falsification

Held: Yes. Batulanon’s act of falsification falls under Article 171 (2) – causing it to appear that
persons have participated in any act or proceeding when they did not in fact so participate. This
is because by signing names of non-members in cash vouchers as payee of the amounts
appearing in the corresponding cash vouchers, Batulanon made it appear that they obtained a
loan and received its proceeds when they did not in fact secure said loan nor receive the
amounts reflected in the cash vouchers. Hence, Batulanon is guilty of falsification.
 Felix Nizurtado vs. Sandiganbayan and People of the Philippines
G.R. No. 107838 | December 7, 1994
Vitug, J.

Facts: Felix Nizurtado was the Barangay Captain of Panghulo, Malabon when he received and
later encashed a check for P10,000.00, specifically intended by way of a loan to the barangay
for its livelihood program. The funds had come from the Ministry of Human Settlements, the
Metro Manila Commission and "Kilusang Kabuhayan at Kaunlaran.” Nizurtado was able to
encash the check on the basis of a resolution of the Barangay Council to the effect that a
livelihood project, had already been identified by the council. The money, however, instead of its
being used for the project, was later lent to, along with petitioner, the members of the Barangay
Council. Nizurtado was charged with the complex crime of malversation of public funds through
falsification of public documents. 

Issue: Whether or not Nizurtado committed the crime of malversation of public funds through
the falsification of a public document punishable under p. 2 of Art. 171 of the RPC

Held: Yes. In falsification under p. 2 of Art. 171 of the RPC, the document need not be an
authentic official paper since its simulation, in fact, is the essence of falsification. The signatures
appearing thereon need not necessarily be forged. In this case, Barangay Councilman Santos
A. Gomez and Barangay Treasurer Manuel P. Romero testified that no meeting had actually
taken place where the barangay livelihood project was allegedly decided. Nizurtado had
induced Romero and Gomez to sign the blank resolution, on the representation that Romero’s
proposal to build a barangay service center would so later be indicated in that resolution as the
barangay livelihood project.
 Rosalio S. Galeos vs. People of the Philippines
G.R. Nos. 174730-37 | February 9, 2011
Villarama, Jr., J.

Facts: As part of their appointments in the Municipal Government, Rosalio Galeos and Federico
Rivera indicated in their SALNs that they do not have relatives in government when in fact, both
are related to Mayor Paulino Ong who extended their appointments. They claimed that they did
not know of such relation but they were convicted of falsification of public documents.

Issue: Whether or not Galeos is guilty of falsification

Held: Yes. One way of committing falsification of a public document is by making untruthful
statements in a narration of facts, which has the elements of the offender 1) doing such in a
public document; 2) having a legal obligation to disclose the truth of the facts narrated by him;
and 3) narrating facts that are absolutely false. All the elements of falsification of public
documents by making untruthful statements have been established by the prosecution. By
saying that he does not have relatives in the government when he is truly related to Ong,
Galeos committed the crime.
 Michael T. Dava vs. The People of the Philippines and the Intermediate Appellate Court
G.R. No. 73905 | September 30, 1991
Fernan, C.J.

Facts: Petitioner Michael Dava’s driver's license was confiscated and he was charged with
homicide and serious physical injuries. One day, Dava was seen driving a Volkswagen.
Knowing that Dava's driver's license was used as an exhibit in court and that no traffic violation
receipt had been issued to Dava, Dava was apprehended for driving without a license. He
showed the police officers a non-professional driver's license with official receipt which his
officemate had secured for him. He was brought to the police station and charged with
falsification of a public document. Prosecution witnesses testified that the license was "fake or
illegally issued". Although the form used for the license was genuine, the signature of the
issuing official was fake.

Issue: Whether or not the accused can be convicted of falsification of a public document

Held: Yes. Through misrepresentation that he had no driver’s license, petitioner was able to
induce his officemate to deal with "fixers" in securing the subject driver's license. A blank form of
the driver’s license which is filled up with personal data and the signature of the registrar of the
San Fernando LTC agency was affixed therein, even if the same was simulated, becomes a
public document within the purview of Articles 171 and 172. The driver's license being a public
document, proof of the fourth element of damage caused to another person or at least an intent
to cause such damage has become immaterial. In falsification of public or official documents,
the principal thing being punished is the violation of the public faith and the destruction of the
truth proclaimed therein.
 Mark Clemente y Martinez vs. People of the Philippines
G.R. No. 194367 | June 15, 2011
Villarama, Jr., J.

Facts: Martinez was a detainee at the Manila City Jail. On August 7, 2007, an informant in the
person of inmate Francis dela Cruz approached JO1s Domingo David, Jr. and Michael Passilan.
The informant narrated that he received a counterfeit P500.00 bill from appellant with orders to
buy a bottle of soft drink from the Manila City Jail Bakery. The bakery employee, however,
recognized the bill as a fake and refused to accept the same. Later on, a total of 23 pieces of
P500.00 bills were confiscated from Martinez’s wallet. Martinez was charged and found guilty of
a violation of Article 168 of the RPC by the RTC.

Issue: Whether or not petitioner should be convicted with a violation of Article 168 of the RPC

Held: No. In this case, the prosecution failed to show that petitioner used the counterfeit money
or that he intended to use the counterfeit bills. Francis dela Cruz, to whom petitioner supposedly
gave the fake ₱500.00 bill to buy soft drinks, was not presented in court. According to the jail
officers, they were only informed by Dela Cruz that petitioner asked the latter to buy soft drinks
at the Manila City jail bakery using a fake ₱500.00 bill. In short, the jail officers did not have
personal knowledge that petitioner asked Dela Cruz to use the ₱500.00 bill. Their account,
however, is hearsay and not based on the personal knowledge. Hence, Martinez should be
acquitted. 
 The People of the Philippines vs. Augusto Cortez y Ruiz
G.R. 14905-CR | December 9, 1975
Ericta, J.

Facts: In a meat shop, accused Augusto Cortez introduced himself as a BIR agent with an
identification card bearing another name. He claimed that he is authorized to waive inspection of
books for P400.00. His real identity was discovered and he was apprehended after taking the
money.

Issue: Whether or not Cortez is guilty of usurpation of authority

Held: Yes. There is usurpation of authority when the offender falsely represents himself as an
officer or agent. This is what Cortez did in the case at bar: he claimed to be a BIR agent and
presented a fake ID. Hence, he is guilty of usurpation of authority through falsification of a public
document.
 MELENCIO GIGANTONI vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES and INTERMEDIATE
APPELLATE COURT
G.R. No. L-74727 | June 16, 1988
Yap, C.J.

Facts: Petitioner Melencio Gigantoni went to the office of the Philippine Air Lines to conduct
verification of some travels made by Black Mountain's officials. He represented himself to the
PAL legal officer, also showing his identification card, as a PC-CIS agent investigating a
kidnapping case and requested that he be shown the PAL records. Upon PAL’s inquiry, they
learned that Gigantoni was no longer a CIS agent since June 30, 1980 as he had been
dismissed from the service for gross misconduct. He was then charged with the crime of
Usurpation of Authority. Gigatoni contends that at the time of the alleged commission of the
offense, he was not yet informed of his termination from the service.

Issue: Whether or not the petitioner knowingly and falsely represent himself as an agent of the
CIS, Philippine Constabulary

Held: No. Article 177 of the Revised Penal Code on usurpation of authority or official functions
punishes any person: (a) who knowingly and falsely represents himself to be an officer, agent or
representative of any department or agency of the Philippine Government or of any foreign
government; or (b) who, under pretense of official position, performs any act pertaining to any
person in authority or public officer of the Philippine Government or any foreign government or
any agency thereof, without being lawfully entitled to do so. In the case at bar, the petitioner did
not know of his alleged dismissal effective June 20, 1980. The record is bereft of any evidence
or proof adduced by the prosecution showing that the dismissal was actually conveyed to
petitioner. Hence, he did not knowingly and falsely represent himself as an agent of the CIS,
Philippine Constabulary and is acquitted of the crime charged.
 Corazon Legamia y Rivera v. Intermediate Appellate Court and People of the Philippines
G.R. No. 63817 | August 28, 1984
Abad Santos, J.

Facts: During Corazon Legamia’s live-in arrangement with deceased Emilio Reyes, Michael
Raphael Gabriel L.Reyes was born. From the time they lived together until Emilio’s death,
Corazon was known as Corazon L. Reyes; she styled herself as Mrs. Reyes; and Emilio
introduced her to friends as Mrs. Reyes. After Emilio’s death, Corazon filed a letter claim in
behalf of Michael for death benefits. The letter was signed “Corazon L. Reyes.” For using the
name Reyes although she was not married to Emilio, Felicisima Reyes who was married to
Emilio filed a complaint. Corazon was convicted by the trial court for using an alias in violation of
Commonwealth Act No. 142.

Issue: Whether or not petitioner violated Commonwealth Act No. 142 for using an alias

Held: No. It is not uncommon in Philippine society for a woman to represent herself as the wife
and use the name of the man she is living with despite the fact that the man is married to
another woman. In the case at bar, Corazon had been living with Emilio for almost 20 years. He
introduced her to the public as his wife and she assumed that role and his name without any
sinister purpose or personal material gain in mind. She applied for benefits upon his death not
for herself but for Michael who as a boy of tender years was under her guardianship. Surely, the
lawmakers could not have meant to criminalize what Corazon had done especially because
some of them probably had their own Corazons.
 Reolandi Diaz v. People of the Philippines and Intermediate Appellate Court
G.R. No. 65006 | October 31, 1990
Paras, J.

Facts: Reolandi M. Diaz was a Senior Clerk at the Jose Abad Santos High School. He sought
appointment as School Administrative Assistant I of the same school and as one of the
requirements for appointment to said position, filled up the prescribed personal information
sheet, Civil Service Form 212, and swore to the truth and veracity of the data and information
therein furnished by him before the proper administering officer. He indicated that his highest
educational attainment was Fourth Year A.B. Liberal Arts allegedly pursued or obtained at the
Cosmopolitan and Harvardian Colleges. On the basis thereof, he was extended an appointment
as School Administrative Assistant I. However, he was never enrolled at the Cosmopolitan and
Harvardian Colleges. Petitioner was then charged and convicted of the crime of Falsification of
Official Document by the trial court.

Issue: Whether or not the crime committed by the accused is perjury

Held: Yes. Perjury as defined in Article 183 of the Revised Penal Code is the willful and corrupt
assertion of a falsehood under oath or affirmation administered by authority of law on a material
matter. The elements of perjury are: a) That the accused made a statement under oath or
executed an affidavit upon a material matter; (b) That the statement or affidavit was made
before a competent officer authorized to receive and administer oath; (c) That in that statement
or affidavit, the accused made a willful and deliberate assertion of a falsehood and (d) That the
sworn statement or affidavit containing the falsity is required by law or made for a legal purpose.
All the foregoing elements are present in the case at bar. Hence, the crime committed by the
accused is perjury.
 Honorio Saavedra, Jr. vs. Department of Justice, et al.
G.R. No. 93173 | September 15, 1993
Bellosillo, J.

Facts: Following Honorio Saavedra Jr.’s failure to pay his balance for his stocks with Pine
Philippines, Inc., he filed on behalf of PPI a verified complaint for damages, alleging that he is
PPI’s president. During the pendency of the case, Ramos of PPI filed a criminal case for perjury
against Saavedra alleging that the latter perjured himself when he declared in the verification of
the complaint that he was PPI’s president.

Issue: Whether or not there is a prima facise case to convict Saavedra of perjury

Held: No. The four elements of perjury shall be taken into account in determining whether there
is a prima facie case. Mere assertion of a falsehood is not enough to amount to perjury. The
assertion must be deliberate and willful. While there may have been a falsehood asserted, no
evidence exists to show that the same was done deliberately and willfully. The records show
that the assertion was done in good faith. Hence, there is no prima facie case to convict
Saavedra of perjury.
 Union Bank of the Philippines and Desi Tomas vs. People of the Philippines
G.R. No. 192565 | February 28, 2012
BRION, J.

Facts: Certification against Forum Shopping was made integral parts of two complaints for sum
of money with prayer for a writ of replevin against respondent spouses Eddie Tamondong and
Eliza B. Tamondong. Spouses filed a complaint-affidavit against Desi Tomas for violation of
Article 183 of the RPC for making a false narration in a Certificate against Forum Shopping.

Issue: Whether or not perjury is committed

Held: Yes. The constitutive act of the offense is the making of an affidavit; thus, the criminal act
is consummated when the statement containing a falsity is subscribed and sworn before a duly
authorized person. All of the elements of perjury are present in this case. First, the petitioner
executed Certificate Against Forum Shopping, duly notarized in Makati City. Second, deliberate
falsehood was also sufficiently alleged to have been committed in Makati City, not Pasay City.
The Information indicates that the petitioner has not commenced any other action or proceeding
involving the same issues in another tribunal or agency, accused knowing well that said material
statement was false.
 PATERNO J. OUANO vs. COURT OF APPEALS and FRANCISCO B. ECHAVEZ
G.R. No. 40203 | August 21, 1990
Narvasa, J.:

Facts: In a public bidding for a property in Cebu owned by the Rehabilitation Finance
Corporation, Paterno Ouano and Francisco Echavez both orally agreed that only Echavez
would make a bid at the second bidding called by the RFC, and that if it was accepted, they
would divide the property in proportion to their adjoining properties. To ensure success of their
scheme, they had also agreed to induce the only other party known to be interested in the
property — a group headed by a Mrs. Bonsucan — to desist from presenting a bid, as they did
succeed in inducing Mrs. Bonsucan's group to withdraw from the sale, paying said group
P2,000 as reimbursement for its expenses.

Issue: Whether or not Ouano and Echavez are guilty of machinations in public auctions

Held: Yes. Under Article 185 of the Revised Penal Code, “any person who shall solicit any gift
or promise as a consideration for refraining from taking part in any public auction, and any
person who shall attempt to cause bidders to stay away from an auction by threats, gifts,
promises, or any other artifice, with intent to cause the reduction of the price of the thing
auctioned.“ What Ouano and Echazed did constitute a crime. They had promised to share in the
property in question as a consideration for Ouano's refraining from taking part in the public
auction, and they had attempted to cause and in fact succeeded in causing another bidder to
stay away from the auction in order to cause reduction of the price of the property auctioned. In
so doing, they committed the felony of machinations in public auctions defined and penalized in
Article 185 of the Revised Penal Code.