31 People vs Franklin

PEOPLE vs. FRANKLIN GR No. L-21507 June 7, 1971 TOPIC: Loss o !"e !"#n$ %ue o& #'(oss#)#*#!+ o (e&o&'ne

FACT:

-

An informati information on was file file in the the Justice Justice of Peace Peace Court Court of Angeles Angeles,, Pampanga Pampanga charging charging Natividad Natividad Franklin with estafa. She was released from custod upon a !ail !ond posted ! the Asian Suret " #nsurance Compan in the amount a mount of P$,%%%.

-

&he CF# CF# set her her arraignm arraignment ent on Jul Jul '( '( ')$ !ut !ut failed failed to appear. appear. #t #t was postponed postponed !ut !ut she she failed failed to appear again

-

Court ordered ordered her arrest arrest and re*ui re*uired red the the suret suret compan compan to to show show cause cause wh the the !ail !ail !ond posted posted should not !e forfeited

-

Court granted granted a period period of thirt thirt das das +from Sept $ $ ')$ ')$ to surren surrender der the the accused accused and failure failure to do so would result to forfeiture of !ond

-

#t was e/tended e/tended for for 0% das das upon the suret suret1s 1s motion motion !ut still still failed failed to presen presentt the accuse accused d

-

Suret filed a motion motion for reduction reduction of !ond !ond for ina!i ina!ilit lit to to produce produce the the accused accused since since the the Philippine 2overnment allowed her to leave the countr and to process to 3SA on Fe! $4 ')$  !ut was denied

-

CA ruled that that suret suret should should have have !een !een released released from from lia!ilit lia!ilit due due to neglig negligence ence of the the Philippi Philippine ne 2overnment in issuing a passport to accused and allowing her to leave the countr. NC '$ was invoked

I/E:

5hether or not not NCC'$ applies applies to this case6

R/LING: NO

-

&he said provision speaks of the relation !etween a de!tor and a creditor which does not e/ist in the case of a suret upon a !ail !ond, on the one hand, and the State, on the other 

-

&he rights and lia!ilities of sureties on a recogni7ance or !ail !ond are, in man respects, different from those of sureties on ordinar !onds or commercial contracts. o

&he former can discharge themselves from lia!ilit ! surrendering their principal8 the latter, as a general rule, can onl !e released ! pament of the de!t or performance of the act stipulated

-

9 the mere fact that a person !inds himself as suret for the accused, he takes charge of, and a!solutel !ecomes responsi!le for the latter:s custod, and under such circumstances it is incum!ent upon him, or rather, it is his inevita!le o!ligation not merel a right, to keep the accused at all times under his surveillance, inasmuch as the authorit emanating from his character as suret is no more nor less than the 2overnment:s authorit to hold the said accused under preventive imprisonment.

-

#t is clear, therefore, that in the ees of the law a suret !ecomes the legal custodian and ;ailer of the accused, there! assuming the o!ligation to keep the latter at all times under his surveillance, and to produce and surrender him to the court upon the latter:s demand.

-

&hat the accused in this case was a!le to secure a Philippine passport which ena!led her to go to the 3nited States was, in fact, due to the suret compan:s fault !ecause it was its dut to do everthing and take all steps necessar to prevent that departure.

-

&his could have !een accomplished ! seasona!l informing the