PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs NARCISO nearest police station or the nearest office of the

SUPAT Y RADOC ALIAS "ISOY"G.R. No. apprehending officer/team. This also means
217027, June 06, 2018 CAGUIOA that the three required witnesses should
already be physically present at the time of
REQUISITES: apprehension - a requirement that can easily
To sustain a conviction for illegal possession of be complied with by the buy-bust team
dangerous drugs the following elements must considering that the buy-bust operation is,
be established: by its nature, a planned activity. In other
(a) the accused was in possession of an item or words, the buy-bust team has enough time and
object identified as a prohibited drug; opportunity to bring with them said witnesses.
(b) such possession was not authorized by law;
and Moreover, while the IRR allows alternative
(c) the accused freely and consciously places for the conduct of the inventory and
possessed the said drug.[29]  photographing of the seized drugs, the
requirement of having the three required
REQUISITES witnesses to be physically present at the time or
On the other hand, for a successful prosecution near the place of apprehension is not dispensed
of the offense of illegal sale of drugs, the with. The reason is simple: it is at the time of
following elements must be proven: arrest - or at the time of the drugs' "seizure
(1) the transaction or sale took place; and confiscation" - that the presence of the
(2) the corpus delicti or the illicit drug was three witnesses is most needed, as it is their
presented as evidence; and presence at the time of seizure and
(3) the buyer and the seller were identified.[30] confiscation that would insulate against the
In both cases, the confiscated drug constitutes police practice of planting evidence.
the very corpus delicti of the offense[31] and the
fact of its existence is vital to sustain a judgment ***The pronouncement of the Court in People v.
of conviction.[32]  Mendoza,[42] is enlightening:
x x x Without the insulating presence of the
It is essential, therefore, that the identity and representative from the media or the
integrity of the seized drugs be established with Department of Justice, or any elected public
moral certainty.[33] The prosecution must prove, official during the seizure and marking of the
beyond reasonable doubt, that the substance sachets of shabu, the evils of switching,
seized from the accused is exactly the same "planting" or contamination of the evidence that
substance offered in court as proof of the crime. had tainted the buy-busts conducted under the
Each link to the chain of custody must be regime of RA No. 6425 (Dangerous Drugs Act of
accounted for.[34] 1972) again reared their ugly heads as to negate
‘
Section 21(1) of RA 9165 plainly requires the the integrity and credibility of the seizure and
apprehending team to conduct a physical confiscation of the sachets of shabu that were
inventory of the seized items and the evidence herein of the corpus delicti, and thus
photographing of the same immediately adversely affected the trustworthiness of the
after seizure and confiscation. Further, the incrimination of the accused. Indeed, the
inventory must be done in the presence of the insulating presence of such witnesses would
accused, his counsel, or representative, a have preserved an unbroken chain of custody.
representative of the DOJ, the media, and an [43]
 (Emphasis supplied)
elected public official, who shall be required to
sign the copies of the inventory and be given a To restate, the presence of the three
copy thereof. witnesses at the time of seizure and
confiscation of the drugs must be secured
***The phrase "immediately after seizure and and complied with at the time of the buy-bust
confiscation" means that the physical arrest; such that they are required to be at or
inventory and photographing of the drugs near the intended place of the arrest so that they
were intended by the law to be made can be ready to witness the inventory and
immediately after, or at the place of photographing of the seized and confiscated
apprehension. drugs "immediately after seizure and
*And only if this is not practicable that the IRR confiscation."
allows the inventory and photographing at the
***Exception
Following the IRR of RA 9165, the
courts may allow a deviation from the In this case, gaps exist in the chain of custody
mandatory requirements of Section 21 of the seized items which creates reasonable
in exceptional cases, where the doubt as to the identity and integrity thereof.
following requisites are present:
1. the existence of justifiable As the seized drugs themselves are the corpus
grounds to allow departure from delicti of the crimes charged, it is of utmost
the rule on strict compliance; and importance that there be no doubt or uncertainty
2. the integrity and the evidentiary as to their identity and integrity. The State, and
value of the seized items are no other party, has the responsibility to explain
properly preserved by the the lapses in the procedures taken to preserve
apprehending team.[44]  the chain of custody of the dangerous drugs.
a. If these elements are Without the explanation by the State, the
present, the seizure and evidence of the corpus delicti is unreliable, and
custody of the confiscated the acquittal of the accused should follow on the
drug shall not be rendered ground that his guilt has not been shown beyond
void and invalid regardless reasonable doubt.[63]
of the noncompliance with The presumption of innocence of the accused
the mandatory requirements vis-a-vis the presumption of regularity in
of Section 21. performance of official duties.
b. It has also been
emphasized that the State The right of the accused to be presumed
bears the burden of proving innocent until proven guilty is a constitutionally
the justifiable cause.[45]  protected right.[64] The burden lies with the
i. Thus, for the said prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable
saving clause to doubt by establishing each and every element of
apply, the the crime charged in the information as to
prosecution must warrant a finding of guilt for that crime or for any
first recognize the other crime necessarily included therein.[65]
lapse or lapses on Presuming that the members of the buy-bust
the part of the buy- team regularly performed their duty was patently
bust team and bereft of any factual and legal basis. We remind
justify or explain the the lower courts that the presumption of
same.[46] regularity in the performance of duty could
DEFINITION: Chain of custody is defined in not prevail over the stronger presumption of
Section 1(b) of Dangerous Drugs Board innocence favoring the accused. Otherwise,
Regulation No. 1, Series of 2002: the constitutional guarantee of the accused
being presumed innocent would be held
b. "Chain of Custody" means the duly recorded subordinate to a mere rule of evidence
authorized movements and custody of allocating the burden of evidence. Where, like
seized drugs or controlled chemicals or here, the proof adduced against the accused
plant sources of dangerous drugs or has not even overcome the presumption of
laboratory equipment of each stage, from innocence, the presumption of regularity in the
the time of seizure/confiscation to receipt performance of duty could not be a factor to
in the forensic laboratory to safekeeping to adjudge the accused guilty of the crime charged.
presentation in court for destruction.

Such record of movements and custody of