COMMISSION OF ANOTHER CRIME

Article 160. Commission of another crime during service of penalty imposed for another
offense; Penalty. - Besides the provisions of Rule 5 of Article 62, any person who shall commit
a felony after having been convicted by final judgment, before beginning to serve such
sentence, or while serving the same, shall be punished by the maximum period of the penalty
prescribed by law for the new felony.

Any convict of the class referred to in this article, who is not a habitual criminal, shall be
pardoned at the age of seventy years if he shall have already served out his original sentence,
or when he shall complete it after reaching the said age, unless by reason of his conduct or
other circumstances he shall not be worthy of such clemency.

COMMISSION OF ANOTHER CRIME DURING SERVICE OF PENALTY IMPOSED FOR ANOTHER

PREVIOUS OFFENSE-PENALTY: (quasi-recidivism)

ELEMENTS
a That the offender was already convicted by final judgement of one offense.

b That he committed a new felony before beginning to serve such sentence or while
serving the same.

Quasi-recidivism : a person after having been convicted by final judgement shall commit a new
felony before beginning to serve such sentence, or while serving the same.

Second crimes must belong to the RPC, not special laws. First crime may be either from the RPC or
special laws

Reiteracion: offender shall have served out his sentence for the prior offense

A quasi-recidivist may be pardoned at age 70. Except: Unworthy or Habitual Delinquent

If new felony is evasion of sentence offender is not a quasi-recidivist

Penalty: maximum period of the penalty for the new felony should be imposed

* Quasi-recidivism is a special aggravating circumstance which directs the court to impose the maximum
period of the penalty prescribed by law for the new felony. The court will do away or will ignore mitigating
and aggravating circumstances in considering the penalty to be imposed. There will be no occasion for the
court to consider imposing the minimum, medium or maximum period of the penalty. The mandate is
absolute and is justified by the finding that the accused is suffering from some degree of moral perversity
if not total incorrigibility. (People vs. Alicia, et al., 95 SCRA 227)

* Quasi-recidivism is an aggravating circumstance which cannot be offset by any mitigating circumstance .

To be appreciated as a special aggravating circumstance, it must be alleged in the information. (People
vs. Bautista, 65 SCRA 460)

Quasi-Recidivism may be offset by a special privileged mitigating circumstance (ex. Minority)

TITLE FOUR
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST

Crimes against public interest

1. Counterfeiting the great seal of the Government of the Philippines (Art. 161);
2. Using forged signature or counterfeiting seal or stamp (Art. 162);
3. Making and importing and uttering false coins (Art. 163);
4. Mutilation of coins, importation and uttering of mutilated coins (Art. 164);
5. Selling of false or mutilated coins, without connivance (Art. 165);
6. Forging treasury or bank notes or other documents payable to bearer, importing and uttering of
such false or forged notes and documents (Art. 166);
7. Counterfeiting, importing and uttering instruments not payable to bearer (Art. 167);
8. Illegal possession and use of forged treasury or bank notes and other instruments of credit (Art.
168);
9. Falsification of legislative documents (Art. 170);
10. Falsification by public officer, employee or notary (Art. 171);
11. Falsification by private individuals and use of falsified documents (Art. 172);
12. Falsification of wireless, cable, telegraph and telephone messages and use of said falsified
messages (Art. 173);
13. False medical certificates, false certificates of merit or service (Art. 174);
14. Using false certificates (Art. 175);
15. Manufacturing and possession of instruments or implements for falsification (Art. 176);
16. Usurpation of authority or official functions (Art. 177);
17. Using fictitious name and concealing true name (Art. 178);
18. Illegal use of uniforms or insignia (Art. 179);
19. False testimony against a defendant (Art. 180);
20. False testimony favorable to the defendant (Art. 181);
21. False testimony in civil cases (Art. 182);
22. False testimony in other cases and perjury (Art. 183);
23. Offering false testimony in evidence (Art. 184);
24. Machinations in public auction (Art. 185);
25. Monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade (Art. 186);
26. Importation and disposition of falsely marked articles or merchandise made of gold, silver, or other
precious metals or their alloys (Art. 187);
27. Substituting and altering trade marks and trade names or service marks (Art. 188);
28. Unfair competition and fraudulent registration of trade mark or trade name, or service mark;
fraudulent designation of origin, and false description (Art. 189).

* The crimes in this title are in the nature of fraud or falsity to the public. The essence of the crime under
this title is that which defraud the public in general. There is deceit perpetrated upon the public. This is
the act that is being punished under this title.

Article 161. Counterfeiting the great seal of the Government of the Philippine Islands, forging
the signature or stamp of the Chief Executive. - The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be
imposed upon any person who shall forge the Great Seal of the Government of the Philippine
Islands or the signature or stamp of the Chief Executive.

COUNTERFEITING GREAT SEAL OF GOVERNMENT

TYPES:
a Forging the great seal of the Government

b Forging the signature of the President

c Forging the stamp of the President

When the signature of the President is forged, it is not falsification but forging of signature under this
article
Signature must be forged, others signed it not the President.

Article 162. Using forged signature or counterfeit seal or stamp. - The penalty of prision mayor
shall be imposed upon any person who shall knowingly make use of the counterfeit seal or
forged signature or stamp mentioned in the preceding article.

USING FORGED SIGNATURE OR COUNTERFEIT SEAL OR STAMP

ELEMENTS:
a That the great seal of the republic was counterfeited or the signature or stamp of
the chief executive was forged by another person.

b That the offender knew of the counterfeiting or forgery.

c That he used the counterfeit seal or forged signature or stamp.

Offender is NOT the forger/not the cause of the counterfeiting

Article163. Making and importing and uttering false coins. - Any person who makes, imports,
or utters, false coins, in connivance with counterfeiters, or importers, shall suffer:

1. Prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods and a fine not to exceed P10,000
pesos, if the counterfeited coin be silver coin of the Philippines or coin of the Central Bank of
the Philippines of ten centavo denomination or above.

2. Prisioncorreccional in its minimum and medium periods and a fine of not to

exceed P2,000 pesos, if the counterfeited coins be any of the minor coinage of the Philippines
or of the Central Bank of the Philippines below ten-centavo denomination.

3. Prisioncorreccional in its minimum period and a fine not to exceed P1,000 pesos, if
the counterfeited coin be currency of a foreign country. (As amended by R.A. No. 4202,
approved June 19, 1965).

MAKING AND IMPORTING AND UTTERING FALSE COINS

ELEMENTS :
a That there be false or counterfeited coins (need not be legal tender).

b That the offender either made, imported or uttered such coins.

c That in case of uttering such false or counterfeited coins, he connives with

counterfeiters or importers.

Coin is counterfeit if it is forged, or if it is not an article of the government as legal tender,

regardless if it is of no value

Kinds of coins the counterfeiting of which is punished

1. Silver coins of the Philippines or coins of the Central Bank of the Philippines;

2. Coins of the minor coinage of the Philippines or of the Central Bank of the Philippines;

3. Coin of the currency of a foreign country.

Counterfeiting imitation of legal or genuine coin (may contain more silver, different design) such as
to deceive an ordinary person in believing it to be genuine

Utter to pass counterfeited coins, deliver or give away

Import to bring to port the same

Both Philippine and foreign state coins

Applies also to coins withdrawn from circulation

 Essence of article: making of coins without authority

Acts punished

1. Mutilating coins of the legal currency, with the further requirements that there be intent to damage
or to defraud another;

2. Importing or uttering such mutilated coins, with the further requirement that there must be
connivances with the mutilator or importer in case of uttering.

The first acts of falsification or falsity are

(1) Counterfeiting refers to money or currency;

(2) Forgery refers to instruments of credit and obligations and securities issued by the Philippine
government or any banking institution authorized by the Philippine government to issue the same;

(3) Falsification can only be committed in respect of documents.

In so far as coins in circulation are concerned, there are two crimes that may be committed:

(1) Counterfeiting coins -- This is the crime of remaking or manufacturing without any authority to
do so.

* In the crime of counterfeiting, the law is not concerned with the fraud upon the public such that even
though the coin is no longer legal tender, the act of imitating or manufacturing the coin of the government
is penalized. In punishing the crime of counterfeiting, the law wants to prevent people from trying their
ingenuity in their imitation of the manufacture of money.

(2) Mutilation of coins -- This refers to the deliberate act of diminishing the proper metal contents of
the coin either by scraping, scratching or filling the edges of the coin and the offender gathers the
metal dust that has been scraped from the coin.

Requisites of mutilation under the Revised Penal Code

(1) Coin mutilated is of legal tender;

(2) Offender gains from the precious metal dust abstracted from the coin; and

(3) It has to be a coin.

There is no expertise involved here. In mutilation of coins under the Revised Penal Code, the offender
does nothing but to scrape, pile or cut the coin and collect the dust and, thus, diminishing the intrinsic
value of the coin.

* Mutilation of coins is a crime only if the coin mutilated is legal tender. If it is not legal tender anymore,
no one will accept it, so nobody will be defrauded. But if the coin is of legal tender, and the offender
minimizes or decreases the precious metal dust content of the coin, the crime of mutilation is committed.

* The offender must deliberately reduce the precious metal in the coin. Deliberate intent arises only when
the offender collects the precious metal dust from the mutilated coin. If the offender does not collect such
dust, intent to mutilate is absent, but Presidential Decree No. 247 will apply.

Article 164. Mutilation of coins; Importation and utterance of mutilated coins. - The penalty of
prisioncorreccional in its minimum period and a fine not to exceed P2,000 pesos shall be
imposed upon any person who shall mutilate coins of the legal currency of the United States or
of the Philippine Islands or import or utter mutilated current coins, or in connivance with
mutilators or importers.
 MULTILATION OF COINS IMPORTATION AND UTTERANCE:

This has been repealed by PD 247. (Defacement, Mutilation, Tearing, Burning or Destroying
Central Bank Notes and Coins)

Under this PD, the acts punishable are:

a willful defacement
b mutilation
c tearing
d burning
e destruction of Central Bank notes and coins

Mutilation to take off part of the metal either by filling it or substituting it for another metal of
inferior quality, to diminish by inferior means (to diminish metal contents).

Foreign notes and coins not included. Must be legal tender.

Must be intention to mutilate.

Mutilation under the Revised Penal Code is true only to coins. It cannot be a crime under the Revised
Penal Code to mutilate paper bills because the idea of mutilation under the code is collecting the precious
metal dust. However, under Presidential Decree No. 247, mutilation is not limited to coins.

Article 165. Selling of false or mutilated coin, without connivance. - The person who knowingly,
although without the connivance mentioned in the preceding articles, shall possess false or
mutilated coin with intent to utter the same, or shall actually utter such coin, shall suffer a
penalty lower by one degree than that prescribed in said articles.

SELLING OF FALSE OR MUTILATED COIN, WITHOUT CONNIVANCE

2 Types
a Possession of coin, counterfeited or mutilated by another person, with intent to utter
the same, knowing that it is false or mutilated.

ELEMENTS:
1 possession

2 with intent to utter, and

3 knowledge

b Actually uttering such false or mutilated coin, knowing the same to be false or
mutilated.

ELEMENTS:
1 actually uttering, and

2 knowledge.

Possession does not require legal tender in foreign coins

Includes constructive possession

* On counterfeiting coins, it is immaterial whether the coin is legal tender or not because the intention of
the law is to put an end to the practice of imitating money and to discourage anyone who might entertain
the idea of imitating money (People vs. Kong Leon).
Article 166. Forging treasury or bank notes on other documents payable to bearer; importing,
and uttering such false or forged notes and documents. - The forging or falsification of
treasury or bank notes or certificates or other obligations and securities payable to bearer and
the importation and uttering in connivance with forgers or importers of such false or forged
obligations or notes, shall be punished as follows:

1. By reclusion temporal in its minimum period and a fine not to exceed P10,000 pesos,
if the document which has been falsified, counterfeited, or altered, is an obligations or
security of the United States or of the Philippines Islands.

The word "obligation or security of the United States or of the Philippine Islands" shall
be held to mean all bonds, certificates of indebtedness, national bank notes, fractional notes,
certificates of deposit, bills, checks, or drafts for money, drawn by or upon authorized officers
of the United States or of the Philippine Islands, and other representatives of value, of
whatever denomination, which have been or may be issued under any act of the Congress of
the United States or of the Philippine Legislature.

2. By prision mayor in its maximum period and a fine not to exceed P5,000 pesos, if the
falsified or altered document is a circulating note issued by any banking association duly
authorized by law to issue the same.

3. By prision mayor in its medium period and a fine not to exceed P5,000 pesos, if the
falsified or counterfeited document was issued by a foreign government.

4. By prision mayor in its minimum period and a fine not to exceed P2,000 pesos, when
the forged or altered document is a circulating note or bill issued by a foreign bank duly
authorized therefor.

FORGING TREASURY OR BANK NOTES IMPORTING AND UTTERING

Acts punishable:
a Forging or falsity of treasury/bank notes or documents payable to bearer

b Importing of such notes

c Uttering of such false or forged obligations and notes in connivance with forgers and
importers

FORGING by giving a treasury or bank note or document payable to bearer/order an appearance of a

true and genuine document

FALSIFICATION by erasing, substituting, counterfeiting or altering by any means the figures and
letters, words, signs contained therein

E.g. falsifying lotto or sweepstakes ticket. Attempted estafa through falsification of an obligation or
security of the Phil

PNB checks not included here its falsification of commercial document under Article 172

Obligation or security includes: bonds, certificate of indebtedness, bills, national bank notes,
coupons, treasury notes, certificate of deposits, checks, drafts for money, sweepstakes money

* If the falsification is done on a document that is classified as a government security, then the crime is
punished under Article 166. On the other hand, if it is not a government security, then the offender may
either have violated Article 171 or 172.
Article 167. Counterfeiting, importing and uttering instruments not payable to bearer. - Any
person who shall forge, import or utter, in connivance with the forgers or importers, any
instrument payable to order or other document of credit not payable to bearer, shall suffer the
penalties of prisioncorreccional in its medium and maximum periods and a fine not
exceeding P6,000 pesos.

COUNTERFEITING, IMPORTING, AND UTTERING INSTRUMENTS NOT PAYABLE TO BEARER

ELEMENTS :
a That there be an instrument payable to order or other document of credit not
payable to bearer.

b That the offender either forged, imported or uttered such instruments.

c That in case of uttering, he connived with the forger or importer.

Article 168. Illegal possession and use of false treasury or bank notes and other instruments
of credit. - Unless the act be one of those coming under the provisions of any of the preceding
articles, any person who shall knowingly use or have in his possession, with intent to use any
of the false or falsified instruments referred to in this section, shall suffer the penalty next
lower in degree than that prescribed in said articles.

ILLEGAL POSSESSION AND USE OF FALSE TREASURY OR BANK NOTES AND OTHER INSTRUMENT
OF CREDIT

ELEMENTS:
a That any treasury or bank note or certificate or other obligation and security payable
to bearer, or any instrument payable to order or other document of credit not
payable to bearer is forged or falsified by another person.

b That the offender knows that any of those instruments is forged or falsified.

c That he performs any of these acts

1 using any of such forged or falsified instrument, or
2 possessing with intent to use any of such forged or falsified instrument.
Act sought to be punished: Knowingly possessing with intent to use any of such forged treasury or bank
notes

Article 169. How forgery is committed. - The forgery referred to in this section 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 order

mentioned therein, the appearance of a true genuine document.

2. By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting or altering by any means the figures, letters,

words or signs contained therein.

FORGERY

How forgery is committed:

a by giving to a treasury or bank note or any instrument payable to bearer or to order, the
appearance of a true and genuine document

b by erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, altering by any means the figures, letters or

words, or signs contained therein.

if all acts done but genuine appearance is not given, the crime is frustrated
* Forgery under the Revised Penal Code applies to papers, which are in the form of obligations and
securities issued by the Philippine government as its own obligations, which is given the same status as
legal tender. Generally, the word counterfeiting is not used when it comes to notes; what is used is
forgery. Counterfeiting refers to money, whether coins or bills.

* Notice that mere change on a document does not amount to this crime. The essence of forgery is giving
a document the appearance of a true and genuine document. Not any alteration of a letter, number,
figure or design would amount to forgery. At most, it would only be frustrated forgery.

* When what is being counterfeited is obligation or securities, which under the Revised Penal Code is given
a status of money or legal tender, the crime committed is forgery.

Five classes of falsification:

(1) Falsification of legislative documents;

(2) Falsification of a document by a public officer, employee or notary public;

(3) Falsification of a public or official, or commercial documents by a private individual;

(4) Falsification of a private document by any person;

(5) Falsification of wireless, telegraph and telephone messages.

* The crime of falsification must involve a writing that is a document in the legal sense. The writing must
be complete in itself and capable of extinguishing an obligation or creating rights or capable of becoming
evidence of the facts stated therein. Until and unless the writing has attained this quality, it will not be
considered as document in the legal sense and, therefore, the crime of falsification cannot be committed in
respect thereto.

Distinction between falsification and forgery:

Falsification is the commission of any of the eight acts mentioned in Article 171 on legislative (only the
act of making alteration), public or official, commercial, or private documents, or wireless, or telegraph
messages.

The term forgery as used in Article 169 refers to the falsification and counterfeiting of treasury or bank
notes or any instruments payable to bearer or to order.

* Note that forging and falsification are crimes under Forgeries.

Article 170. Falsification of legislative documents. - The penalty of prisioncorreccional in its

maximum period and a fine not exceeding P6,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any person
who, without proper authority therefor alters any bill, resolution, or ordinance enacted or
approved or pending approval by either House of the Legislature or any provincial board or
municipal council.

FALSIFICATION OF LEGISLATIVE DOCUMENTS

ELEMENTS :
a That these be a bill, resolution or ordinance enacted or approved or pending approval
by the national assembly or any provincial board or municipal council.

b That the offender (any person) alters the same.

c That he has no proper authority therefor.

d That the alteration has changed the meaning of the document.

* The words "municipal council" should include the city council or municipal board Reyes.

Accused must not be a public official entrusted with the custody or possession of such document
otherwise Art 171 applies .

* The falsification must be committed on a genuine, true and authentic legislative document. If committed
on a simulated, spurious or fabricated legislative document, the crime is not punished under this article
but under Article 171 or 172.

Article 171. Falsification by public officer, employee or notary or ecclesiastic minister. - The
penalty of prision mayor and a fine not to exceed P5,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any
public officer, employee, or notary who, taking advantage of his official position, shall falsify a
document by committing any of the following acts:

1. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric;

2. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when
they did not in fact so participate;

3. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements

other than those in fact made by them;

4. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;

5. Altering true dates;

6. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its

meaning;

7. Issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an original

document when no such original exists, or including in such a copy a statement contrary to, or
different from, that of the genuine original; or

8. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a protocol,

registry, or official book.

The same penalty shall be imposed upon any ecclesiastical minister who shall commit
any of the offenses enumerated in the preceding paragraphs of this article, with respect to
any record or document of such character that its falsification may affect the civil status of
persons.

FALSIFICATION OF DOCUMENTS BY PUBLIC OFFICER, EMPLOYEE, OR NOTARY OR

ECCLESTASTICAL MINISTER

ELEMENTS:
a That the offender is a public officer, employee, or notary public.

b That he takes advantage of his official position.

c That he falsifies a document by committing any of the following acts:

1 Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric.

Requisites:
i That there be an intent to imitate, or an attempt to imitate
 ii That the two signatures or handwritings, the genuine and the forged, bear some
resemblance, to each other

(lack of similitude/imitation of a genuine signature will not be a ground for conviction

under par. 1 but such is not an impediment to conviction under par. 2)

2 Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when
they did not in fact so participate.

3 Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements

other than those in fact made by them.

Requisites:
i That the offender caused it to appear in a document that a person/s participated in an
act or a proceeding; and

ii That such person/s did not in fact so participate in the act or proceeding

4 Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;

Requisites:
i That the offender makes in a document statements in a narration of facts

ii That he has a legal obligation to disclose the truth of the facts narrated by him; (required
by law to be done) and

iii That the facts narrated by the offender are absolutely false; and

iv That the perversion or truth in the narration of facts was made with the wrongful intent
of injuring a third person

There must be a narration of facts, not a conclusion of law. Must be on a material matter

* For one to be held criminally liable for falsification under paragraph 4, the untruthful statement must be
such as to effect the integrity of the document or to change the effects which it would otherwise produce.

Legal obligation means that there is a law requiring the disclosure of the truth of the facts
narrated. Ex. Residence certificates

The person making the narration of facts must be aware of the falsity of the facts narrated
by him. This kind of falsification may be committed by omission

5 Altering true dates.

date must be essential

* For falsification to take place under this paragraph, the date of the document must be material to the
right created or to the obligation that is extinguished.

6 Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its

meaning.

Requisites:
i That there be an alteration (change) or intercalation (insertion) on a document

ii That it was made on a genuine document

iii That the alteration/intercalation has changed the meaning of the document
 iv That the change made the document speak something false.

7 Issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an original

document when no such original exists, or including in such copy a statement
contrary to, or different from, that of the genuine original; (if no knowledge, falsification
through negligence) or

* The acts of falsification mentioned in this paragraph are committed by a public officer or by a notary
public who takes advantage of his official position as custodian of the document. It can also refer to a
public officer or notary who prepared and retained a copy of the document. The falsification can be done in
two ways. It can be a certification purporting to show that the document issued is a copy of the original on
record when no such original exists. It can also be in the form of a certification to the effect that the
document on file contains statements or including in the copy issued, entries which are not found on
contrary to, or different from the original genuine document on file.

8 Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a protocol,

registry, or official book. (genuine document)

* In case the offender is an ecclesiastical minister, the act of falsification is committed with respect to
any record or document of such character that its falsification may affect the civil status of persons.

There is no crime of attempted or frustrated falsification of public document

* Alteration or changes to make the document speak the truth do not constitute falsification. (US vs.
Mateo, 25 Phil. 324)

Persons liable public officer, employee or notary public or ecclesiastical minister

> Either he has duty to intervene in the preparation of the document or it may be a situation wherein the
public officer has official custody of the document.

So even if the offender is a public officer, if her causes the falsification of a document which is not in his
official custody or if the falsification committed by him is not related whatsoever to the performance of
his duties, he will still be liable for falsification but definitely not under this Article but under Article
172. (falsification of documents by a private person)

DOCUMENT: Any written instrument which establishes a right or by which an obligation is extinguished. A
deed or agreement executed by a person setting forth any disposition or condition wherein rights and
obligations may arise.

* Writing may be on anything as long as it is a product of the handwriting, it is considered a document.

Not necessary that what is falsified is a genuine or real document, enough that it gives an appearance
of a genuine article

As long as any of the acts of falsification is committed, whether the document is genuine or not, the
crime of falsification may be committed. Even totally false documents may be falsified.

COUNTERFEITING imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric

FEIGNING simulating a signature, handwriting, or rubric out of one of which does not in fact exist

* It does not require that the writing be genuine. Even if the writing was through and through false, if it
appears to be genuine, the crime of falsification is nevertheless committed.

THERE ARE FOUR KINDS OF DOCUMENTS:

(1) Public document in the execution of which, a person in authority or notary public has taken part;
(2) Official document in the execution of which a public official takes part;
(3) Commercial document or any document recognized by the Code of Commerce or any commercial
law; and
(4) Private document in the execution of which only private individuals take part.

* Public document is broader than the term official document. Before a document may be considered
official, it must first be a public document. But not all public documents are official documents. To become
an official document, there must be a law which requires a public officer to issue or to render such
document. Example: A cashier is required to issue an official receipt for the amount he receives. The
official receipt is a public document which is an official document.

Liability of a private individual in falsification by a public officer when there is conspiracy.

Under Republic Act 7975, when a public officer who holds a position classified as Grade 27 or higher,
commits a crime in relation to the performance of his official functions, the case against him will fall under
the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. If a private person is included in the accusation because of the
existence of conspiracy in the commission of the crime, the Sandiganbayan shall maintain jurisdiction over
the person of the co-accused, notwithstanding the fact that said co-accused is a private individual. If the
public officer is found guilty, the same liability and penalty shall be imposed on the private individual .
(U.S. vs. Ponce, 20 Phil. 379)

Article 172. Falsification by private individual and use of falsified documents. - The penalty of
prisioncorreccional in its medium and maximum periods and a fine of not more than P5,000
pesos shall be imposed upon:

1. Any private individual who shall commit any of the falsifications enumerated in the
next preceding article in any public or official document or letter of exchange or any other kind
of commercial document; and

2. Any person who, to the damage of a third party, or with the intent to cause such
damage, shall in any private document commit any of the acts of falsification enumerated in
the next preceding article.

Any person who shall knowingly introduce in evidence in any judicial proceeding or to
the damage of another or who, with the intent to cause such damage, shall use any of the
false documents embraced in the next preceding article, or in any of the foregoing
subdivisions of this article, shall be punished by the penalty next lower in degree.

FALSIFICATION OF PUBLIC, OFFICIAL, OR COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT BY A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL

(par 1)

ELEMENTS
a That the offender is a private individual or a public officer or employee who did not take
advantage of his official position.

b That he committed any of the acts of falsification enumerated in ART. 171.

1 Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric.

2 Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when
they did not in fact so participated.

3 Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements

other than those in fact made by them.

4 Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;

5 Altering true dates.

 6 Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its
meaning.

c That the falsification was committed in any public or official or commercial document.

Under this paragraph, damage is not essential, it is presumed

* If the falsification of public, official or commercial documents, whether they be public official or by private
individuals, it is not necessary that there be present the idea of gain or the intent to injure a third person.
What is punished under the law is the violation of public faith and the perversion of the truth as solemnly
proclaimed by the nature of the document. (Sarep vs. Sandiganbayan)

Defense: lack of malice or criminal intent

The following writings are public:

a the written acts or records of acts of the sovereign authority of official bodies and tribunals, and of
the public officers, legislative, judicial and executive, whether of the Philippines or of a foreign
country.

b Public records kept in the Philippines.

Examples of commercial documents warehouse receipts, airway bills, bank checks, cash files, deposit
slips and bank statements, journals, books, ledgers, drafts, letters of credit and other negotiable
instruments
There is a complex crime of estafa through falsification of public, official or commercial
document. In the crime of estafa, damage or intent to cause damage is not an element. It is sufficient
that the offender committed or performed the acts of falsification as defined and punished under Article
171. The two offenses can co-exist as they have distinct elements peculiar to their nature as a crime.
When the falsification is committed because it is necessary to commit estafa, what we have is a complex
crime defined and punished under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code.

There is a complex crime of falsification of pubic documents through reckless imprudence.

Cash disbursement vouchers or receipts evidencing payments are not commercial documents

A mere blank form of an official document is not in itself a document

The possessor of falsified document is presumed to be the author of the falsification

FALSIFICATION UNDER PARAGRAPH 2 OF ART. 172. OF PRIVATE DOCUMENT

ELEMENTS :
a That the offender committed any of the acts of falsification, except those in paragraph 7
and 8, enumerated in art. 171.

b That the falsification was committed in any private document (must affect the truth or
integrity of the document)

c That the falsification caused damage (essential element; hence, no crime of estafa thru
falsification of private document) to a third party or at least the falsification was committed
with intent to cause such damage.

Not necessary that the offender profited or hoped to profit from the falsification

* Falsification of a private document is consummated when such document is actually falsified with the
intent to prejudice a third person whether such falsified document is or is not thereafter put to illegal use
for which it is intended. (Lopez vs. Paras, 36 Phil. 146)
* What is emphasized at this point is the element of falsification of private document. There must be intent
to cause damage or damage is actually caused. The intention is therefore must be malicious or there is
deliberate intent to commit a wrong. Reckless imprudence is incompatible with malicious intent.

Falsification is not a continuing offense

* There is no falsification through reckless imprudence if the document is a private document.

Falsification by omission

* Mere falsification of a private document is not enough to commit crime under paragraph 2 of Article 172.
Two acts must be done by the offender. 1) He must have performed in the private document the
falsification contemplated under Article 171. 2) He must have performed an independent act which
operates to cause damage or prejudice to a third person. The third person mentioned herein may include
the government. Damage is not limited to money or pecuniary prejudice. Damage to ones honor,
reputation or good name is included.

A document falsified as a necessary means to commit another crime must be public, official or
commercial

There is no complex crime of estafa through falsification of a private document because the
immediate effect of the latter is the same as that of estafa

* If a private document is falsified to cause damage to the offended party, the crime committed is
falsification of a private document. Remember that in estafa, damage or intent to cause damage is an
indispensable element of the crime. The same element is necessary to commit the crime of falsification of
private document. Since they have a common element, such element cannot be divided into the two parts
and considered as two separate offenses.

* There is no complex crime of estafa with falsification because deceit is a common element of both. One
and the same deceit or damage cannot give rise to more than one crime. It is either estafa or falsification.

Criteria to determine whether the crime is estafa only or falsification only :

IF the falsification of the private document was essential in the commission of estafa because the
falsification, estafa cannot be committed, the crime is falsification; estafa becomes the consequence of the
crime.

IF the estafa can be committed even without resorting to falsification, the latter being resorted only to
facilitate estafa, the main crime is estafa; falsification is merely incidental, since even without falsification,
estafa can be committed.

If the estafa was already consummated at the time of the falsification of a private document was
committed for the purpose of concealing the estafa, the falsification is not punishable, because as
regards the falsification of the private document there was no damage or intent to cause damage.

* A private document which is falsified to obtain money from offended party is a falsification of private
document only.

A private document may acquire the character of a public document when it becomes part of an official
record and is certified by a public officer duly authorized by law

The crime is falsification of public documents even if falsification took place before the private
document becomes part of the public records
Examples:
An employee of a private company who punches the bundy clock on behalf on a co-employee is guilty of
falsification of a private document.

One who will take the civil service examination for another and makes it appear that he is the examinee is
guilty of falsification of a public document.

USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENT (par. 3, art. 172)

ELEMENTS:

a Introducing in a judicial proceeding:

1 That the offender knew that a document was falsified by another person.

2 That the false document is embraced in art. 171 or in any subdivisions nos. 1 and 2
of art. 172.

3 That he introduced said document in evidence in any judicial proceeding. (intent to

cause damage not necessary)

b Use in any other transaction:

1 That the offender knew that a document was falsified by another person.

2 That the false document is embraced in art. 171 or in any of subdivisions nos. 1 and
2 of art. 172.

3 That he used such documents (not in judicial proceedings).

4 That the use of the documents caused damage to another or at least was used with
intent to cause such damage.

The user of the falsified document is deemed the author of falsification, if:
a the use is so closely connected in time with the falsification

b the user had the capacity of falsifying the document

Falsification of Private Falsification of Public/Official Documents

Documents
Prejudice to third party is an Prejudice to third persons is immaterial, what
element of the offense. is punished is the violation of public faith and
perversion of truth which the document
proclaims.

Rules to observe in the use of a falsified document.

1. It is a crime when knowingly introduced in a judicial proceeding even if there is not intent to cause
damage to another. Knowingly introducing a falsified document in a judicial proceeding, the use alone
is not a crime. The mere introduction of the forged document is the crime itself. But when the falsified
document is knowingly introduced in an administrative proceeding, the use alone is not a crime. There
must be intent to cause damage or damage is actually inflicted.

2. Falsification of document is a separate and distinct offense from that of the use of falsified documents.
So if the falsification of document was done or performed because it was necessary to the use of the
same and in the commission of the crime, then we may have a complex crime defined and punished
under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code.

3. Good faith is a defense in falsification of public document.