Rule 113, Sec. 5, Revised Rules of Court

Article 124 – Arbitrary Detention, Revised Penal Code
Art. 124. Arbitrary detention. – Any public officer or employee who, without legal grounds, detains a
person, shall suffer:
1. The penalty of arresto mayor, in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period,
if the detention has not exceeded three days;
2. The penalty prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods, if the detention has
continued more than three but not more than fifteen days;
3. The penalty of prision mayor, if the detention has continued for more than fifteen days but not
more than six months; and
4. That of reclusion temporal, if the detention shall have exceeded six months.
The commission of a crime, or violent insanity or any other ailment requiring the compulsory
confinement of the patient in a hospital, shall be considered legal grounds for detention of any
person.
RULE 113, Revised Rules of Court
Section 5. Arrest without warrant; when lawful. — A peace officer or a private person may, without a
warrant, arrest a person:
(a) When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing,
or is attempting to commit an offense;
(b) When an offense has just been committed, and he has probable cause to believe based
on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has
committed it; and
(c) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal
establishment or place where he is serving final judgment or is temporarily confined while his
case is pending, or has escaped while being transferred from one confinement to another.
In cases falling under paragraph (a) and (b) above, the person arrested without a warrant shall be
forthwith delivered to the nearest police station or jail and shall be proceeded against in accordance
with section 7 of Rule 112. (5a)
Milo vs. Salanga
On Arbitrary Detention, Article 124 of the RPC
G.R. No. L-37007
July 20, 1987
FACTS
An information for Arbitrary Detention was filed against herein private respondent (accused Barrio Captain
Tuvera, Sr.) and some other private persons for maltreating petitioner Valdez by hitting him with butts of their
guns and fist blows. Immediately thereafter, without legal grounds and with deliberate intent to deprive the
latter of his constitutional liberty, accused respondent and two members of the police force of Mangsat
conspired and helped one another in lodging and locking petitioner inside the municipal jail of Manaoag,
Pangasinan for about eleven (11) hours.
Accused-respondent then filed a motion to quash the information on the ground that the facts charged do not
constitute the elements of said crime and that the proofs adduced at the investigation are not sufficient to
support the filing of the information. Petitioner Asst. Provincial Fiscal Milo filed an opposition thereto.
Consequently, averring that accused-respondent was not a public officer who can be charged with Arbitrary
Detention, respondent Judge Salanga granted the motion to quash in an order. Hence, this petition.
ISSUE
Whether or not accused-respondent, being a Barrio Captain, can be liable for the crime of Arbitrary Detention.
HELD
Yes. The public officers liable for Arbitrary Detention must be vested with authority to detain or order the
detention of persons accused of a crime. One need not be a police officer to be chargeable with Arbitrary
Detention. It is accepted that other public officers like judges and mayors, who act with abuse of their
functions, may be guilty of this crime. A perusal of the powers and function vested in mayors would show that
they are similar to those of a barrio captain except that in the case of the latter, his territorial jurisdiction is
smaller. Having the same duty of maintaining peace and order, both must be and are given the authority to
detain or order detention. Noteworthy is the fact that even private respondent Tuvera himself admitted that
with the aid of his rural police, he as a barrio captain, could have led the arrest of petitioner Valdez.
ESCRA
Arbitrary Detention is committed by a public officer who, without legal grounds, detains a
person. The elements of this crime are the following:
1
1. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
2. That he detains a person.
3. That the detention is without legal grounds. 2
The public officers liable for Arbitrary Detention must be vested with authority to detain or order the
detention of persons accused of a crime. Such public officers are the policemen and other agents of
the law, the judges or mayors.
One need not be a police officer to be chargeable with Arbitrary Detention. It is accepted that other
public officers like judges and mayors, who act with abuse of their functions, may be guilty of this
crime. A perusal of the powers and function vested in mayors would show that they are similar to
22
those of a barrio captain except that in the case of the latter, his territorial jurisdiction is smaller.
23
Having the same duty of maintaining peace and order, both must be and are given the authority to
detain or order detention. Noteworthy is the fact that even private respondent Tuvera himself
admitted that with the aid of his rural police, he as a barrio captain, could have led the arrest of
petitioner Valdez. 24

Rule 113, Sec. 5, Revised Rules of Court

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rule 113, Sec. 5, Revised Rules of Court

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rule 113, Sec. 5, Revised Rules of Court

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Article 124 – Arbitrary Detention, Revised Penal Code

RULE 113, Revised Rules of Court

G.R. No. L-37007

July 20, 1987

Pangasinan for about eleven (11) hours.

1. That the offender is a public officer or employee.

2. That he detains a person.

3. That the detention is without legal grounds. 2

You might also like