Sayo vs. Chief of Police of Manila

Bernardino Malinao filed a complaint of robbery against Melencio Sayo (D) and Joaquin Mostero (D). In view of the complaint, Benjamin Dumlao, a policeman of the City of Manila, arrested Sayo (D) and Mostero (D), and presented a complaint against them with the city fiscal's office of Manila. When the petition for habeas corpus was heard, Sayo (D) and Mostero (D) were still detained or under arrest, and the city fiscal had not yet released or filed charges against them with the proper courts justice.

1. Is the city fiscal of Manila a judicial authority within the meaning of the provisions of article 125 of the Revised Penal Code? 2. Does the peace officer have the authority to arrest a person without a warrant upon complaint? 3. Was there any failure of delivery of the petitioners to the proper judicial authorities? 1. NO. The words "judicial authority", as used in said article, mean the courts of justices or judges of

said courts vested with judicial power to order the temporary detention or confinement of a person charged with having committed a public offense, that is, "the Supreme Court and such inferior courts as may be established by law". Judicial authority mentioned in Article 125 of the RPC cannot be considered to include the fiscal of the City of Manila or any other city, because they cannot issue a warrant of arrest or of commitment or temporary confinement of a person surrendered to legalize the detention of a person arrested without warrant. 2. NO. A peace officer has no power or authority to arrest or detain a person charged with an offense

upon complaint of the offended party even though, after investigation, he becomes convinced that the accused is guilty of the offense charged. What he or the complainant may do in such case is to file a complaint with the city fiscal of Manila, or directly with the justice of the peace courts. If no charge is filed by the fiscal in court within six hours, the arresting officer must release the detainee; otherwise, he will be guilty under Article 125. 3. YES. Article 125 of the RPC punishes any public officer or employee who, after detaining a person, "shall fail to deliver such person to the proper judicial authorities within the period of six hours." In the case at bar, the arresting officer did not deliver Sayo and Mostero to any authority, and much less to any judicial authority. Their filing of a complaint with the office of the fiscal of Manila is not a delivery of the persons of petitioners. The continued detention and confinement of petitioners for more than six hours is a clear violation under Article 125 of the RPC. Hence, Sayo and Mostero were immediately released.