135 Batulanon v People ACA

G.R. NO. 139857, September 15, 2006

YNARES-SANTIAGO J.:

BLURB:
TOPIC: Title IV: CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST > Chapter 1: Forgeries > Art 171-172:
Falsification
DOCTRINE: The elements of falsification of private document under Article 172, paragraph 2 of the
Revised Penal Code are: (1) that the offender committed any of the acts of falsification, except those
in paragraph 7, Article 171; (2) that the falsification was committed in any private document; and (3)
that the falsification caused damage to a third party or at least the falsification was committed with
intent to cause such damage.
SUPERSUMMARY: Petitioner Leonila Batulanon, a manager-cashier of Polomolok Credit
Cooperative, Inc., (PCCI), was charged with four informations of the crime of estafa through
falsification of commercial documents. She made it appear that four borrowers deposited in PCCI, and
obtained a loan from it by signing the vouchers of the borrowers and indicating in the deposits and
loan ledger that such borrowers deposited to the bank, when in truth and in fact, they did not deposit
nor sign the vouchers. Leonila Batulanon was found guily by the lower court, as is in the CA. Thus,
she filed a petition to SC. The issue is w/n Batulanon is guilty of estafa through falsification of private
documents. The Court upheld the previous rulings. It stated that all the elements of estafa through
falsification of private documents under Art 172(2) are present. First, Batulanon, by signing the name
of Omadlao, Oracion, and Arroyo in the said cash vouchers respectively, 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. Second, the vouchers are private documents because they are not documents
used by merchants or businessmen to promote or facilitate trade or credit transactions nor are they
defined and regulated by the Code of Commerce or other commercial law. Third and last, PCCI is
prejudiced by Batulanon’s actions because the loan transactions are reflected in its books as accounts
receivable.

FACTS:

 Petitioner Leonila Batulanon, a manager-cashier of Polomolok Credit Cooperative, Inc.,

(PCCI), was convicted of the crime of estafa through falsification of commercial documents.
 She was charged with four informations of the said crime:
o Criminal Case No. 3625: Batulanon made it appear the Erlinda Omadlao was
granted a loan and received an amount of P4,160 by signing on the appropriate line
thereon the signature of Omadlao, when in truth and in facts the said person was
never granted a loan, never received the same, and never signed the cash/check
voucher issued in her name.
o Criminal Case No 3626: Batulanon made it appear that Gonafreda Oracion was
granted a loan of P4,000 by signing the signature of Oracion when in truth and in fact
said person was never granted a loan, never received the same, and never signed
the cash/check voucher issued in her name.
o Criminal Case No. 3453: Batulanon made it appear in the Individual Deposits and
Loan ledger that Ferlyn Arroyo made a fixed deposit, and was granted a loan by
PCCI hen in truth and in fact Arroyo never made such a deposit and was never
granted loan and after the document was falsified. Batulanon also signed therein the
signature of Arroyo in the cash/check voucher, making it appear Arroyo obtained a
loan.
 o Criminal Case No. 3627: Batulanon made it appear in the Individual Deposits and
Loan ledger that Dennis Batulanon had a fixed deposit with the PCCI and was
granted a loan, when in truth and in fact, he never made such a deposit and was
never granted loan and offer the document was so falsified. Batulanon also signed
therein in the cash/check voucher the signature of Dennis.
 Batulanon pleaded not guilty, so a trial ensued. The prosuction presented three witnesses
namely, Maria Theresa Medallo (Medallo), Benedicto Gopio, Jr. (Gopio), and Bonifacio
Jayoma (Jayoma).
o Medallo, the posting clerk whose job was to assist Batulanon in the preparation of
the vouchers, testified that Batulanon released four vouchers with varying amounts to
Omadlao, Oracion, Arroyo, and D. Batulanon. She also testified that Omadlao,
Oracion, and D. Batulanon were not eligible to apply for loan because they were not
bona fide members of the cooperative. Arroyo, on the other hand, was a member of
the cooperative but there was no proof that she applied for a loan with PCCI. She
also withdrew her membership in PCCI. Medallo stated that pursuant to the
cooperative's by-laws, only bona fide members who must have a fixed deposit are
eligible for loans. Medallo categorically stated that she saw Batulanon sign the
names of Oracion, Omadlao and Arroyo in their respective cash vouchers and made
it appear in the records that they were payees and recipients of the amount stated
therein.
o Gopio, a member of PCCI and its board of directors, corroborated Medallo’s
testimony that Omadlao, Arroyo, Oracion, and D. Batulanon are not members of
PCCI.
o Jayoma, Vice-Chairman of PCCI Board of Directors, testified that the loans made to
Oracion, Omadlao, Arroyo and Dennis Batulanon did not pass through the
cooperative's Credit Committee and PCCI's Board of Directors for screening
purposes. He claimed that Oracion's signature is Batulanon's handwriting. Jayoma
also testified that among the four loans taken, only that in Arroyo's name was settled.
 Batulanon denied all the charges against her. However, the lower court found her guilty.
Thus, she appealed to CA which also affirmed the decision, but with modification that she is
guilty of estafa through falsification of private documents. MoR was also denied, thus, her
petition to SC.
 She contended, among others, that the crime of falsification of private document requires as
an element prejudice to a third person. She insists that PCCI has not been prejudiced by
these loan transactions because these loans are accounts receivable by the cooperative.

ISSUE: WN Batulanon is guilty of estafa through falsification of private documents - YES

RULING: YES. The Court upheld the previous rulings. The elements of falsification of private
document under Article 172, paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code are: (1) that the offender
committed any of the acts of falsification, except those in paragraph 7, Article 171; (2) that the
falsification was committed in any private document; and (3) that the falsification caused damage to
a third party or at least the falsification was committed with intent to cause such damage. In this
case, all elements are present.

In Criminal Case Nos. 3625, 3626, and 3453, Batulanon's act of falsification falls under
paragraph 2 of Article 171, i.e., 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 the name of
Omadlao, Oracion, and Arroyo in the said cash vouchers respectively, 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.
 The prosecution established that Batulanon caused the preparation of the Cash Vouchers in
the name of Omadlao and Oracion knowing that they are not PCCI members and not qualified for a
loan from the cooperative. In the case of Arroyo, Batulanon was aware that while the former is a
member, she did not apply for a loan with the cooperative. Medallo categorically declared that she
saw Batulanon forge the signatures of Oracion and Arroyo in the vouchers and made it appear that
the amounts stated therein were actually received by these persons. As to the signature of Arroyo,
Medallo's credible testimony and her familiarity with the handwriting of Batulanon proved that it was
indeed the latter who signed the name of Arroyo.

CA also correctly ruled that the vouchers are private documents because they are not
documents used by merchants or businessmen to promote or facilitate trade or credit transactions
nor are they defined and regulated by the Code of Commerce or other commercial law. Rather, they
are private documents, which have been defined as deeds or instruments executed by a private
person without the intervention of a public notary or of other person legally authorized, by which
some disposition or agreement is proved, evidenced or set forth.

It is also correct the PCCI is prejudiced by Batulanon’s actions because the loan transactions
are reflected in its books as accounts receivable. It has been established that PCCI only grants
loans to its bona fide members with no subsisting loan. These alleged borrowers are not members of
PCCI and neither are they eligible for a loan. Of the four accounts, only that in Ferlyn Arroyo's name
was settled because her mother, Erlinda, agreed to settle the loan to avoid legal prosecution with the
understanding however, that she will be reimbursed once the money is collected from Batulanon.

DISPOSITION: WHEREFORE, the Decision appealed from is AFFIRMED with the following
MODIFICATIONS:

(1) In Criminal Case Nos. 3625, 3626 and 3453, Leonila Batulanon is found GUILTY of three counts
of falsification of private documents and is sentenced to suffer the penalty of six (6) months of
arresto mayor, as minimum, to four (4) years and two (2) months of prison correccional, as
maximum, for each count, and to indemnify complainant Polomolok Credit Cooperative Incorporated
the amount of P11,660.00 with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from November 28, 1994 until
finality of this judgment. The interest rate of 12% per annum shall be imposed from finality of this
judgment until its satisfaction; and

(2) In Criminal Case No. 3627, Leonila Batulanon is found GUILTY of estafa and is sentenced to
suffer the penalty of three (3) months of arresto mayor, as minimum, to one (1) year and eight (8)
months of prision correccional, as maximum. She is likewise ordered to indemnify Polomolok Credit
Cooperative Incorporated the sum of P5,000.00 with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from
November 28, 1994 until finality of this judgment. The interest rate of 12% per annum shall be
imposed from finality of this judgment until its satisfaction.

IOW, Batulanon is guilty of estafa through falsification pf private documents.