Article 157

EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE

ELEMENTS :
a. That the offender is a convict by final judgment.
b.

on, he returned to the Philippines in violation of the sentence. Held: He is not guilty of Evasion of Service of
Sentence as the law is not applicable to offenses executed by deportation. (U.S. vs. Loo Hoe, 36 Phil. 867).
Article 158
EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE ON THE OCCASION OF DISORDERS, CONFLAGRATIONS,
EARTHQUAKES OR OTHER CALAMITIES

That he is serving his sentence which consists in deprivation of liberty (destierro included)

c.

That he evades the service of his sentence by escaping during the term if his sentence. ( fact of
return immaterial).
By the very nature of the crime, it cannot be committed when the prisoner involved is merely a detention
prisoner. But it applies to persons convicted by final judgment with a penalty of destierro.

ELEMENTS :
a. That the offender is a convict by final judgement who is confined in a penal institution.
b.

That there is disorder, resulting from- 1. conflagration,

2. earthquake, or
3. explosion, or
4. similar catastrophe, or
5. mutiny , not participated.

c.

That the offender evades the service of his sentence by leaving the penal institution where he is
confined, on the occasion of such disorder or during the mutiny.

d.

That the offender fails to give himself up to the authorities within 48 hours following the
issuance of a proclamation by the chief executive announcing the passing away of such
calamity.

* A detention prisoner even if he escapes from confinement has no criminal liability . Thus, escaping from his prison
cell when his case is still on appeal does not make said prisoner liable for Evasion of Service of Sentence.

In leaving or escaping from jail or prison, that the prisoner immediately returned is immaterial. It is enough that
he left the penal establishment by escaping therefrom. His voluntary return may only be mitigating, being
analogous to voluntary surrender. But the same will not absolve his criminal liability.

A continuing offense.

Offenders not minor delinquents nor detention prisoners

If escaped within the 15 day appeal period no evasion

No applicable to deportation as the sentence

The crime of evasion of service of sentence may be committed even if the sentence is destierro, and this is
committed if the convict sentenced to destierro will enter the prohibited places or come within the
prohibited radius of 25 kilometers to such places as stated in the judgment.

* If the sentence violated is destierro, the penalty upon the convict is to be served by way of destierro also, not
imprisonment. This is so because the penalty for the evasion can not be more severe than the penalty evaded.

Circumstances qualifying the offense (done thru):

a.
unlawful entry (by scaling)
b.

breaking doors, windows, gates, walls, roofs or floors

c.

using picklocks, false keys, disguise, deceit, violence or intimidation

d.

connivance with other convicts or employees of the penal institution

* A, a foreigner, was found guilty of violation of the law, and was ordered by the court to be deported. Later

The leaving from the penal establishment is not the basis of criminal liability. It is the failure to return
within 48 hours after the passing of the calamity, conflagration or mutiny had been announced. Under Article 158,
those who return within 48 hours are given credit or deduction from the remaining period of their sentence
equivalent to 1/5 of the original term of the sentence. But if the prisoner fails to return within said 48 hours, an
added penalty, also 1/5, shall be imposed but the 1/5 penalty is based on the remaining period of the sentence, not on
the original sentence. In no case shall that penalty exceed six months.

Offender must escape to be entitled to allowance

> Those who did not leave the penal establishment are not entitled to the 1/5 credit. Only those who left and
returned within the 48-hour period.

For such event to be considered as a calamity, the President must declared it to be so. He must issue a
proclamation to the effect that the calamity is over. Even if the events herein mentioned may be considered
as calamity, there is a need for the Chief Executive to make such announcement. Absent such declaration.
Even if the prisoner will return to the penal institution where he was confined, the same is of no moment
as in the meantime he has committed a violation of the law, not under the present article but for pure
evasion of service of sentence under Article 157.

Mutiny organized unlawful resistance to a superior officer, a sedition, a revolt

when the sentence has already lapsed.

The mutiny referred to in the second form of evasion of service of sentence does not include riot. The
mutiny referred to here involves subordinate personnel rising against the supervisor within the penal
establishment. One who escapes during a riot will be subject to Article 157, that is, simply leaving or escaping
the penal establishment.
Disarming the guards is not mutiny

* Violation attributed to the accused is no longer referred to the court for judicial inquiry or resolution. The law
has provided sufficient guidelines for the jail warden to follow.

* Article 159 is a distinct felony. It is a substantive crime. For one to suffer the consequence of its violation, the
prisoner must be formally charged in court. He will be entitled to a full blown hearing, in full enjoyment of his
right to due process. Only after a final judgment has been rendered against him may he suffer the penalty
prescribed under Article 159 (Torres vs. Gonzales, et al., 152 SCRA 292)

* This disquisition will not apply if the offender who escapes taking advantage of the calamities enumerated
herein is apprehended by the authorities after 48 hours from the declaration that the calamity is over. It is only
extended to one who returns but made inside the 48 hours delimited by the proclamation. At this stage, the
violation is not substantive but administrative in nature.

VIOLATION OF PARDON
Infringement of conditions/terms of President

Article 159
VIOLATION OF CONDITIONAL PARDON

ELEMENTS:
a. That the offender was a convict.
b.

That he was granted a conditional pardon by the chief executive.

c.

That he violated any of the conditions of such pardon.

Condition extends to special laws violation of illegal voting

The condition imposed upon the prisoner not to be guilty of another crime is not limited to those punishable
under the Revised Penal Code. It includes those punished under Special Law. (People vs. Corral, 74 Phil. 357).

Offender must have been found guilty of the subsequent offense before he can be prosecuted under this
Article. But if under Revised Admin Code, no conviction necessary. President has power to arrest,
reincarnate offender without trial

ORDINARY EVASION
To evade the penalty given by the courts disturbs
the public order

Two penalties provided:

a. prision correccional in its minimum period if the penalty remitted does not exceed 6 years
b.

the unexpired portion of his original sentence if the penalty remitted is higher than 6 years

COMMISSION OF ANOTHER CRIME

Article 160
COMMISSION OF ANOTHER CRIME DURING SERVICE OF PENALTY IMPOSED FOR ANOTHER
PREVIOUS OFFENSE-PENALTY: (quasi-recidivism)

ELEMENTS
a. That the offender was already convicted by final judgement of one offense.
b. That he committed a new felony before beginning to serve such sentence or while serving the same.

* In violation of conditional pardon, as a rule, the violation will amount to this crime only if the condition is violated
during the remaining period of the sentence.

Quasi-recidivism : a person after having been convicted by final judgement shall commit a new felony
before beginning to serve such sentence, or while serving the same.

* If the condition of the pardon is violated, the remedy against the accused may be in the form of prosecution
under Article 159. it may also be an administrative action by referring the violation to the court of origin and
praying for the issuance of a warrant of arrest justified under Section 64 of the Revised Administrative Code.

Second crimes must belong to the RPC, not special laws. First crime may be either from the RPC or special
laws

Reiteracion: offender shall have served out his sentence for the prior offense

A quasi-recidivist may be pardoned at age 70. Except: Unworthy or Habitual Delinquent

If new felony is evasion of sentence offender is not a quasi-recidivist

Penalty: maximum period of the penalty for the new felony should be imposed

The administrative liability of the convict under the conditional pardon is different and has nothing to do with
his criminal liability for the evasion of service of sentence in the event that the condition of the pardon has
been violated. Exception: where the violation of the condition of the pardon will constitute evasion of
service of sentence, even though committed beyond the remaining period of the sentence. This is when
the conditional pardon expressly so provides or the language of the conditional pardon clearly shows the
intention to make the condition perpetual even beyond the unserved portion of the sentence. In such case,
the convict may be required to serve the unserved portion of the sentence even though the violation has taken place

* Quasi-recidivism is a special aggravating circumstance which directs the court to impose the maximum
period of the penalty prescribed by law for the new felony. The court will do away or will ignore mitigating
and aggravating circumstances in considering the penalty to be imposed. There will be no occasion for the
court to consider imposing the minimum, medium or maximum period of the penalty. The mandate is absolute
and is justified by the finding that the accused is suffering from some degree of moral perversity if not total
incorrigibility. (People vs. Alicia, et al., 95 SCRA 227)
* Quasi-recidivism is an aggravating circumstance which cannot be offset by any mitigating circumstance. To be
appreciated as a special aggravating circumstance, it must be alleged in the information. (People vs. Bautista,
65 SCRA 460)

Quasi-Recidivism may be offset by a special privileged mitigating circumstance (ex. Minority)

TITLE FOUR
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST

26.
Importation and disposition of falsely marked articles or merchandise made of gold, silver, or other
precious metals or their alloys (Art. 187);
27.
Substituting and altering trade marks and trade names or service marks (Art. 188);
28.
Unfair competition and fraudulent registration of trade mark or trade name, or service mark;
fraudulent designation of origin, and false description (Art. 189).
* The crimes in this title are in the nature of fraud or falsity to the public. The essence of the crime under this
title is that which defraud the public in general. There is deceit perpetrated upon the public. This is the act
that is being punished under this title.
Article 161
COUNTERFEITING GREAT SEAL OF GOVERNMENT

TYPES:
a.

Forging the great seal of the Government

Crimes against public interest

b.

Forging the signature of the President

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

c.

Forging the stamp of the President

7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.

Counterfeiting the great seal of the Government of the Philippines (Art. 161);
Using forged signature or counterfeiting seal or stamp (Art. 162);
Making and importing and uttering false coins (Art. 163);
Mutilation of coins, importation and uttering of mutilated coins (Art. 164);
Selling of false or mutilated coins, without connivance (Art. 165);
Forging treasury or bank notes or other documents payable to bearer, importing and uttering of such
false or forged notes and documents (Art. 166);
Counterfeiting, importing and uttering instruments not payable to bearer (Art. 167);
Illegal possession and use of forged treasury or bank notes and other instruments of credit (Art. 168);
Falsification of legislative documents (Art. 170);
Falsification by public officer, employee or notary (Art. 171);
Falsification by private individuals and use of falsified documents (Art. 172);
Falsification of wireless, cable, telegraph and telephone messages and use of said falsified messages
(Art. 173);
False medical certificates, false certificates of merit or service (Art. 174);
Using false certificates (Art. 175);
Manufacturing and possession of instruments or implements for falsification (Art. 176);
Usurpation of authority or official functions (Art. 177);
Using fictitious name and concealing true name (Art. 178);
Illegal use of uniforms or insignia (Art. 179);
False testimony against a defendant (Art. 180);
False testimony favorable to the defendant (Art. 181);
False testimony in civil cases (Art. 182);
False testimony in other cases and perjury (Art. 183);
Offering false testimony in evidence (Art. 184);
Machinations in public auction (Art. 185);
Monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade (Art. 186);

When the signature of the President is forged, it is not falsification but forging of signature under this
article

Signature must be forged, others signed it not the President.

Article 162
USING FORGED SIGNATURE OR COUNTERFEIT SEAL OR STAMP

ELEMENTS:
a. That the great seal of the republic was counterfeited or the signature or stamp of the chief
executive was forged by another person.

b.

That the offender knew of the counterfeiting or forgery.

c.

That he used the counterfeit seal or forged signature or stamp.

Offender is NOT the forger/not the cause of the counterfeiting

Article 163
MAKING AND IMPORTING AND UTTERING FALSE COINS

ELEMENTS :
a. That there be false or counterfeited coins (need not be legal tender).
b.

That the offender either made, imported or uttered such coins.

c.

That in case of uttering such false or counterfeited coins, he connives with counterfeiters or

importers.
Coin is counterfeit if it is forged, or if it is not an article of the government as legal tender, regardless if it
is of no value

(1)

Counterfeiting coins -- This is the crime of remaking or manufacturing without any authority to do so.

Kinds of coins the counterfeiting of which is punished

* In the crime of counterfeiting, the law is not concerned with the fraud upon the public such that even though
the coin is no longer legal tender, the act of imitating or manufacturing the coin of the government is penalized . In
punishing the crime of counterfeiting, the law wants to prevent people from trying their ingenuity in their
imitation of the manufacture of money.

1.

Silver coins of the Philippines or coins of the Central Bank of the Philippines;

(2)

2.

Coins of the minor coinage of the Philippines or of the Central Bank of the Philippines;

3.

Coin of the currency of a foreign country.

Counterfeiting imitation of legal or genuine coin (may contain more silver, different design) such as to
deceive an ordinary person in believing it to be genuine

Utter to pass counterfeited coins, deliver or give away

Import to bring to port the same

Both Philippine and foreign state coins

Applies also to coins withdrawn from circulation

Essence of article: making of coins without authority

Acts punished
1.

Mutilating coins of the legal currency, with the further requirements that there be intent to damage
or to defraud another;

2.

Importing or uttering such mutilated coins, with the further requirement that there must be
connivances with the mutilator or importer in case of uttering.

The first acts of falsification or falsity are

(1)

Requisites of mutilation under the Revised Penal Code

(1)

Coin mutilated is of legal tender;

(2)

Offender gains from the precious metal dust abstracted from the coin; and

(3)

It has to be a coin.

* The offender must deliberately reduce the precious metal in the coin. Deliberate intent arises only when the
offender collects the precious metal dust from the mutilated coin. If the offender does not collect such dust, intent
to mutilate is absent, but Presidential Decree No. 247 will apply.
Article 164

MULTILATION OF COINS IMPORTATION AND UTTERANCE:

This has been repealed by PD 247. (Defacement, Mutilation, Tearing, Burning or Destroying Central Bank
Notes and Coins)
Under this PD, the acts punishable are:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

Counterfeiting refers to money or currency;

Falsification can only be committed in respect of documents.

In so far as coins in circulation are concerned, there are two crimes that may be committed:

There is no expertise involved here. In mutilation of coins under the Revised Penal Code, the offender does
nothing but to scrape, pile or cut the coin and collect the dust and, thus, diminishing the intrinsic value of the coin.

* Mutilation of coins is a crime only if the coin mutilated is legal tender . If it is not legal tender anymore, no one will
accept it, so nobody will be defrauded. But if the coin is of legal tender, and the offender minimizes or
decreases the precious metal dust content of the coin, the crime of mutilation is committed.

(2)
Forgery refers to instruments of credit and obligations and securities issued by the Philippine
government or any banking institution authorized by the Philippine government to issue the same;
(3)

Mutilation of coins -- This refers to the deliberate act of diminishing the proper metal contents of the coin
either by scraping, scratching or filling the edges of the coin and the offender gathers the metal dust that has
been scraped from the coin.

willful defacement
mutilation
tearing
burning
destruction of Central Bank notes and coins

Mutilation to take off part of the metal either by filling it or substituting it for another metal of inferior
quality, to diminish by inferior means (to diminish metal contents).

Foreign notes and coins not included. Must be legal tender.

Must be intention to mutilate.

Mutilation under the Revised Penal Code is true only to coins. It cannot be a crime under the Revised Penal Code to
mutilate paper bills because the idea of mutilation under the code is collecting the precious metal dust.
However, under Presidential Decree No. 247, mutilation is not limited to coins.

Article 165
SELLING OF FALSE OR MUTILATED COIN, WITHOUT CONNIVANCE

2 Types
a.

ELEMENTS:
1.
possession

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

1.
The people playing cara y cruz, before they throw the coin in the air would rub the money
to the sidewalk thereby diminishing the intrinsic value of the coin. Is the crime of mutilation committed?
Mutilation, under the Revised Penal Code, is not committed because they do not collect the precious metal
content that is being scraped from the coin. However, this will amount to violation of Presidential Decree No. 247.
2.
When the image of Jose Rizal on a five-peso bill is transformed into that of Randy
Santiago, is there a violation of Presidential Decree No. 247?

b.

She was guilty of violating Presidential Decree No. 247 because if no one ever picks up the coins, her act would
result in the diminution of the coin in circulation.
5.
A certain customer in a restaurant wanted to show off and used a P 20.00 bill to light his
cigarette. Was he guilty of violating Presidential Decree No. 247?
He was guilty of arrested for violating of Presidential Decree No. 247. Anyone who is in possession of defaced
money is the one who is the violator of Presidential Decree No. 247. The intention of Presidential Decree No. 247 is not to
punish the act of defrauding the public but what is being punished is the act of destruction of money issued by the Central
Bank of the Philippines.

So, if the act of mutilating coins does not involve gathering dust like playing cara y cruz, that is not mutilation under the
Revised Penal Code because the offender does not collect the metal dust. But by rubbing the coins on the sidewalk, he also
defaces and destroys the coin and that is punishable under Presidential Decree No. 247.

with intent to utter, and

3.

knowledge

Actually uttering such false or mutilated coin, knowing the same to be false or mutilated.

2.

knowledge.

Possession does not require legal tender in foreign coins

Includes constructive possession

* On counterfeiting coins, it is immaterial whether the coin is legal tender or not because the intention of the
law is to put an end to the practice of imitating money and to discourage anyone who might entertain the idea
of imitating money (People vs. Kong Leon).
Article 166
FORGING TREASURY OR BANK NOTES IMPORTING AND UTTERING

Note that persons making bracelets out of some coins violate Presidential Decree No. 247.
The primary purpose of Presidential Decree No. 247 at the time it was ordained was to stop the practice of people writing
at the back or on the edges of the paper bills, such as "wanted: pen pal".

2.

ELEMENTS:
1.
actually uttering, and

Yes. Presidential Decree No. 247 is violated by such act.

4.
An old woman who was a cigarette vendor in Quiapo refused to accept one-centavo coins
for payment of the vendee of cigarettes he purchased. Then came the police who advised her that she has no
right to refuse since the coins are of legal tender. On this, the old woman accepted in her hands the onecentavo coins and then threw it to the face of the vendee and the police. Was the old woman guilty of violating
Presidential Decree No. 247?

Possession of coin, counterfeited or mutilated by another person, with intent to utter the same,
knowing that it is false or mutilated.

Acts punishable:
a. Forging or falsity of treasury/bank notes or documents payable to bearer
b.

Importing of such notes

c.

Uttering of such false or forged obligations and notes in connivance with forgers and importers

FORGING by giving a treasury or bank note or document payable to bearer/order an appearance of a

true and genuine document

FALSIFICATION by erasing, substituting, counterfeiting or altering by any means the figures and
letters, words, signs contained therein

of a true and genuine document

E.g. falsifying lotto or sweepstakes ticket. Attempted estafa through falsification of an obligation or
security of the Phil

b.

PNB checks not included here its falsification of commercial document under Article 172

c.

Obligation or security includes: bonds, certificate of indebtedness, bills, national bank notes, coupons,
treasury notes, certificate of deposits, checks, drafts for money, sweepstakes money

* If the falsification is done on a document that is classified as a government security, then the crime is
punished under Article 166. On the other hand, if it is not a government security, then the offender may either
have violated Article 171 or 172.
Article 167
COUNTERFEITING, IMPORTING, AND UTTERING INSTRUMENTS NOT PAYABLE TO BEARER

ELEMENTS :
a. That there be an instrument payable to order or other document of credit not payable to bearer.
b.

That the offender either forged, imported or uttered such instruments.

c.

That in case of uttering, he connived with the forger or importer.

Article 168
ILLEGAL POSSESSION AND USE OF FALSE TREASURY OR BANK NOTES AND OTHER
INSTRUMENT OF CREDIT

ELEMENTS:
a. That any treasury or bank note or certificate or other obligation and security payable to
bearer, or any instrument payable to order or other document of credit not payable to bearer is
forged or falsified by another person.
b.

That the offender knows that any of those instruments is forged or falsified.

c.

That he performs any of these acts

1.
using any of such forged or falsified instrument, or
2.
possessing with intent to use any of such forged or falsified instrument.
Act sought to be punished: Knowingly possessing with intent to use any of such forged treasury or bank
notes

Article 169
FORGERY

How forgery is committed:

a. by giving to a treasury or bank note or any instrument payable to bearer or to order, the appearance

by erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, altering by any means the figures, letters or words, or signs
contained therein.
if all acts done but genuine appearance is not given, the crime is frustrated

* Forgery under the Revised Penal Code applies to papers, which are in the form of obligations and securities issued by the
Philippine government as its own obligations, which is given the same status as legal tender . Generally, the word
counterfeiting is not used when it comes to notes; what is used is forgery. Counterfeiting refers to money,
whether coins or bills.
* Notice that mere change on a document does not amount to this crime. The essence of forgery is giving a
document the appearance of a true and genuine document. Not any alteration of a letter, number, figure or design
would amount to forgery. At most, it would only be frustrated forgery.
* When what is being counterfeited is obligation or securities, which under the Revised Penal Code is given a status
of money or legal tender, the crime committed is forgery.
Questions & Answers
1.
Instead of the peso sign (P), somebody replaced it with a dollar sign ($). Was the crime of
forgery committed?
No. Forgery was not committed. The forged instrument and currency note must be given the appearance of a
true and genuine document. The crime committed is a violation of Presidential Decree No. 247. Where the currency note,
obligation or security has been changed to make it appear as one which it purports to be as genuine, the crime is forgery.
In checks or commercial documents, this crime is committed when the figures or words are changed which materially alters
the document.
2.
An old man, in his desire to earn something, scraped a digit in a losing sweepstakes ticket,
cut out a digit from another ticket and pasted it there to match the series of digits corresponding to the
winning sweepstakes ticket. He presented this ticket to the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office. But the
alteration is so crude that even a child can notice that the supposed digit is merely superimposed on the digit
that was scraped. Was the old man guilty of forgery?
NO Because of the impossibility of deceiving whoever would be the person to whom that ticket is presented, the
Supreme Court ruled that what was committed was an impossible crime. Note, however, that the decision has been
criticized. In a case like this, the Supreme Court of Spain ruled that the crime is frustrated. Where the alteration is such
that nobody would be deceived, one could easily see that it is a forgery, the crime is frustrated because he has done all the
acts of execution which would bring about the felonious consequence but nevertheless did not result in a consummation
for reasons independent of his will.
3.

A person has a twenty-peso bill. He applied toothache drops on one side of the bill. He

has a mimeograph paper similar in texture to that of the currency note and placed it on top of the twenty-peso
bill and put some weight on top of the paper. After sometime, he removed it and the printing on the twentypeso bill was reproduced on the mimeo paper. He took the reverse side of the P20 bill, applied toothache
drops and reversed the mimeo paper and pressed it to the paper. After sometime, he removed it and it was
reproduced. He cut it out, scraped it a little and went to a sari-sari store trying to buy a cigarette with that bill.
What he overlooked was that, when he placed the bill, the printing was inverted. He was apprehended and
was prosecuted and convicted of forgery. Was the crime of forgery committed?

Article 170
FALSIFICATION OF LEGISLATIVE DOCUMENTS

The Supreme Court ruled that it was only frustrated forgery because although the offender has performed all the
acts of execution, it is not possible because by simply looking at the forged document, it could be seen that it is not
genuine. It can only be a consummated forgery if the document which purports to be genuine is given the appearance of a
true and genuine document. Otherwise, it is at most frustrated.

ELEMENTS :
a. That these be a bill, resolution or ordinance enacted or approved or pending approval by the
national assembly or any provincial board or municipal council.
b.

That the offender (any person) alters the same.

c.

That he has no proper authority therefor.

d.

That the alteration has changed the meaning of the document.

Five classes of falsification:

* The words "municipal council" should include the city council or municipal board Reyes.

(1)

Falsification of legislative documents;

(2)

Falsification of a document by a public officer, employee or notary public;

(3)

Falsification of a public or official, or commercial documents by a private individual;

(4)

Falsification of a private document by any person;

(5)

Falsification of wireless, telegraph and telephone messages.

* The crime of falsification must involve a writing that is a document in the legal sense. The writing must be
complete in itself and capable of extinguishing an obligation or creating rights or capable of becoming evidence
of the facts stated therein. Until and unless the writing has attained this quality, it will not be considered as
document in the legal sense and, therefore, the crime of falsification cannot be committed in respect thereto.
Distinction between falsification and forgery:
Falsification is the commission of any of the eight acts mentioned in Article 171 on legislative (only the act of
making alteration), public or official, commercial, or private documents, or wireless, or telegraph messages.

Accused must not be a public official entrusted with the custody or possession of such document
otherwise Art 171 applies .

* The falsification must be committed on a genuine, true and authentic legislative document. If committed on a
simulated, spurious or fabricated legislative document, the crime is not punished under this article but under
Article 171 or 172.
Article 171
FALSIFICATION OF DOCUMENTS
ECCLESTASTICAL MINISTER

BY

PUBLIC

OFFICER,

EMPLOYEE,

OR

NOTARY

OR

ELEMENTS:
a.
That the offender is a public officer, employee, or notary public.
b.

That he takes advantage of his official position.

c.

That he falsifies a document by committing any of the following acts:

1.

The term forgery as used in Article 169 refers to the falsification and counterfeiting of treasury or bank notes or
any instruments payable to bearer or to order.

Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric.

Requisites:
i.

* Note that forging and falsification are crimes under Forgeries.

2.

That there be an intent to imitate, or an attempt to imitate

ii.

That the two signatures or handwritings, the genuine and the forged, bear some
resemblance, to each other

(lack of similitude/imitation of a genuine signature will not be a ground for

conviction under par. 1 but such is not an impediment to conviction under par. 2)

Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when they did not

3.

in fact so participate.

ii.

That it was made on a genuine document

Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements other than
those in fact made by them.

iii.

That the alteration/intercalation has changed the meaning of the document

iv.

That the change made the document speak something false.

Requisites:
i.
That the offender caused it to appear in a document that a person/s participated
in an act or a proceeding; and
ii.
4.

That such person/s did not in fact so participate in the act or proceeding

Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;

Requisites:
i.

That the offender makes in a document statements in a narration of facts

ii.

That he has a legal obligation to disclose the truth of the facts narrated by him;
(required by law to be done) and

iii.

That the facts narrated by the offender are absolutely false; and

iv.

That the perversion or truth in the narration of facts was made with the wrongful
intent of injuring a third person

There must be a narration of facts, not a conclusion of law. Must be on a material matter * For one to be held
criminally liable for falsification under paragraph 4, the untruthful statement must be such as to effect the
integrity of the document or to change the effects which it would otherwise produce.

5.

Legal obligation means that there is a law requiring the disclosure of the truth of the facts
narrated. Ex. Residence certificates
The person making the narration of facts must be aware of the falsity of the facts narrated
by him. This kind of falsification may be committed by omission

Altering true dates.

date must be essential

* For falsification to take place under this paragraph, the date of the document must be material to the right
created or to the obligation that is extinguished.
6.

7.

Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its meaning.
Requisites:
i.

Issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an original document

when no such original exists, or including in such copy a statement contrary to, or different
from, that of the genuine original; (if no knowledge, falsification through negligence) or

* The acts of falsification mentioned in this paragraph are committed by a public officer or by a notary public
who takes advantage of his official position as custodian of the document. It can also refer to a public officer or
notary who prepared and retained a copy of the document. The falsification can be done in two ways. It can be a
certification purporting to show that the document issued is a copy of the original on record when no such
original exists. It can also be in the form of a certification to the effect that the document on file contains
statements or including in the copy issued, entries which are not found on contrary to, or different from the
original genuine document on file.
8.

Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a protocol, registry, or
official book. (genuine document)

* In case the offender is an ecclesiastical minister, the act of falsification is committed with respect to any
record or document of such character that its falsification may affect the civil status of persons.

There is no crime of attempted or frustrated falsification of public document

* Alteration or changes to make the document speak the truth do not constitute falsification. (US vs. Mateo, 25
Phil. 324)

Persons liable public officer, employee or notary public or ecclesiastical minister

> Either he has duty to intervene in the preparation of the document or it may be a situation wherein the public
officer has official custody of the document.

So even if the offender is a public officer, if her causes the falsification of a document which is not in his
official custody or if the falsification committed by him is not related whatsoever to the performance of his
duties, he will still be liable for falsification but definitely not under this Article but under Article 172.
(falsification of documents by a private person)

DOCUMENT: Any written instrument which establishes a right or by which an obligation is extinguished. A
deed or agreement executed by a person setting forth any disposition or condition wherein rights and
obligations may arise.
* Writing may be on anything as long as it is a product of the handwriting, it is considered a document.

That there be an alteration (change) or intercalation (insertion) on a document

Not necessary that what is falsified is a genuine or real document, enough that it gives an appearance of a

genuine article

in fact so participated.

As long as any of the acts of falsification is committed, whether the document is genuine or not, the crime of
falsification may be committed. Even totally false documents may be falsified.

3.

Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements other than
those in fact made by them.

COUNTERFEITING imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric

4.

Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;

FEIGNING simulating a signature, handwriting, or rubric out of one of which does not in fact exist

5.

Altering true dates.

* It does not require that the writing be genuine. Even if the writing was through and through false, if it appears to be
genuine, the crime of falsification is nevertheless committed.

6.

Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its meaning.

THERE ARE FOUR KINDS OF DOCUMENTS:

(1)
Public document in the execution of which, a person in authority or notary public has taken part;
(2)
Official document in the execution of which a public official takes part;
(3)
Commercial document or any document recognized by the Code of Commerce or any commercial law; and
(4)
Private document in the execution of which only private individuals take part.
* Public document is broader than the term official document. Before a document may be considered official, it must
first be a public document. But not all public documents are official documents. To become an official
document, there must be a law which requires a public officer to issue or to render such document. Example:
A cashier is required to issue an official receipt for the amount he receives. The official receipt is a public
document which is an official document.

c.

ELEMENTS
a.
That the offender is a private individual or a public officer or employee who did not take
advantage of his official position.
b.

That he committed any of the acts of falsification enumerated in ART. 171.

1.

Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric.

2.

Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when they did not

Under this paragraph, damage is not essential, it is presumed

* If the falsification of public, official or commercial documents, whether they be public official or by private
individuals, it is not necessary that there be present the idea of gain or the intent to injure a third person . What is
punished under the law is the violation of public faith and the perversion of the truth as solemnly proclaimed
by the nature of the document. (Sarep vs. Sandiganbayan)

Liability of a private individual in falsification by a public officer when there is conspiracy.

Under Republic Act 7975, when a public officer who holds a position classified as Grade 27 or higher, commits a
crime in relation to the performance of his official functions, the case against him will fall under the jurisdiction
of the Sandiganbayan. If a private person is included in the accusation because of the existence of conspiracy in the
commission of the crime, the Sandiganbayan shall maintain jurisdiction over the person of the co-accused,
notwithstanding the fact that said co-accused is a private individual. If the public officer is found guilty, the same
liability and penalty shall be imposed on the private individual. (U.S. vs. Ponce, 20 Phil. 379)
Article 172
FALSIFICATION OF PUBLIC, OFFICIAL, OR COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT BY A PRIVATE
INDIVIDUAL (par 1)

That the falsification was committed in any public or official or commercial document.

Defense: lack of malice or criminal intent

The following writings are public:
a. the written acts or records of acts of the sovereign authority of official bodies and tribunals, and of
the public officers, legislative, judicial and executive, whether of the Philippines or of a foreign
country.
b.

Public records kept in the Philippines.

Examples of commercial documents warehouse receipts, airway bills, bank checks, cash files, deposit slips
and bank statements, journals, books, ledgers, drafts, letters of credit and other negotiable instruments
There is a complex crime of estafa through falsification of public, official or commercial document. In the
crime of estafa, damage or intent to cause damage is not an element. It is sufficient that the offender committed
or performed the acts of falsification as defined and punished under Article 171. The two offenses can co-exist
as they have distinct elements peculiar to their nature as a crime. When the falsification is committed because it
is necessary to commit estafa, what we have is a complex crime defined and punished under Article 48 of the
Revised Penal Code.

There is a complex crime of falsification of pubic documents through reckless imprudence.

Cash disbursement vouchers or receipts evidencing payments are not commercial documents

A mere blank form of an official document is not in itself a document

The possessor of falsified document is presumed to be the author of the falsification

FALSIFICATION UNDER PARAGRAPH 2 OF ART. 172. OF PRIVATE DOCUMENT

ELEMENTS :
a. That the offender committed any of the acts of falsification, except those in paragraph 7 and 8,
enumerated in art. 171.
b.

That the falsification was committed in any private document (must affect the truth or integrity of the
document)

c.

That the falsification caused damage (essential element; hence, no crime of estafa thru falsification of
private document) to a third party or at least the falsification was committed with intent to cause
such damage.

Not necessary that the offender profited or hoped to profit from the falsification

have a common element, such element cannot be divided into the two parts and considered as two separate
offenses.
* There is no complex crime of estafa with falsification because deceit is a common element of both. One and the
same deceit or damage cannot give rise to more than one crime. It is either estafa or falsification.
Criteria to determine whether the crime is estafa only or falsification only :
IF the falsification of the private document was essential in the commission of estafa because the
falsification, estafa cannot be committed, the crime is falsification; estafa becomes the consequence of the
crime.
IF the estafa can be committed even without resorting to falsification, the latter being resorted only to
facilitate estafa, the main crime is estafa; falsification is merely incidental, since even without falsification,
estafa can be committed.
If the estafa was already consummated at the time of the falsification of a private document was
committed for the purpose of concealing the estafa, the falsification is not punishable, because as regards
the falsification of the private document there was no damage or intent to cause damage.

* Falsification of a private document is consummated when such document is actually falsified with the intent
to prejudice a third person whether such falsified document is or is not thereafter put to illegal use for which it
is intended. (Lopez vs. Paras, 36 Phil. 146)

* What is emphasized at this point is the element of falsification of private document. There must be intent to
cause damage or damage is actually caused. The intention is therefore must be malicious or there is deliberate
intent to commit a wrong. Reckless imprudence is incompatible with malicious intent.

* A private document which is falsified to obtain money from offended party is a falsification of private
document only.

* There is no falsification through reckless imprudence if the document is a private document.

A private document may acquire the character of a public document when it becomes part of an official
record and is certified by a public officer duly authorized by law

The crime is falsification of public documents even if falsification took place before the private document
becomes part of the public records

Falsification is not a continuing offense

Falsification by omission

* Mere falsification of a private document is not enough to commit crime under paragraph 2 of Article 172. Two
acts must be done by the offender. 1) He must have performed in the private document the falsification
contemplated under Article 171. 2) He must have performed an independent act which operates to cause
damage or prejudice to a third person. The third person mentioned herein may include the government.
Damage is not limited to money or pecuniary prejudice. Damage to ones honor, reputation or good name is
included.

A document falsified as a necessary means to commit another crime must be public, official or commercial

There is no complex crime of estafa through falsification of a private document because the immediate
effect of the latter is the same as that of estafa

* If a private document is falsified to cause damage to the offended party, the crime committed is falsification of
a private document. Remember that in estafa, damage or intent to cause damage is an indispensable element of
the crime. The same element is necessary to commit the crime of falsification of private document. Since they

Examples:
An employee of a private company who punches the bundy clock on behalf on a co-employee is guilty of
falsification of a private document.
One who will take the civil service examination for another and makes it appear that he is the examinee is
guilty of falsification of a public document.
USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENT (par. 3, art. 172)

ELEMENTS:
a.

Introducing in a judicial proceeding:

1.
That the offender knew that a document was falsified by another person.
2.

That the false document is embraced in art. 171 or in any subdivisions nos. 1 and 2 of art. 172.

3.

b.

That he introduced said document in evidence in any judicial proceeding. (intent to cause damage
not necessary)

2.

Use in any other transaction:

1.
That the offender knew that a document was falsified by another person.
2.

That the false document is embraced in art. 171 or in any of subdivisions nos. 1 and 2 of art.
172.

3.

That he used such documents (not in judicial proceedings).

4.

That the use of the documents caused damage to another or at least was used with intent to
cause such damage.

b.

3.

The user of the falsified document is deemed the author of falsification, if:
a.
the use is so closely connected in time with the falsification

the user had the capacity of falsifying the document not intent to cause damage to another. Knowingly
introducing a falsified document in a judicial proceeding, the use alone is not a crime. The mere
introduction of the forged document is the crime itself. But when the falsified document is knowingly
introduced in an administrative proceeding, the use alone is not a crime. There must be intent to cause
damage or damage is actually inflicted.
2. Falsification of document is a separate and distinct offense from that of the use of falsified documents. So if
the falsification of document was done or performed because it was necessary to the use of the same and
in the commission of the crime, then we may have a complex crime defined and punished under Article
48 of the Revised Penal Code.

Falsifying wireless, telegraph or telephone message

Requisites:
a.
That the offender is an officer or employee of the government or an officer or employee of a
private corporation, engaged in the service of sending or receiving wireless, cable or
telephone message.

That the accused commits any of the following acts:

uttering fictitious wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message, or
falsifying wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message

Using such falsified message

Requisites:
a.
That the accused knew that wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message was falsified
by any of the person specified in the first paragraph of art. 173.
b.

That the accused used such falsified dispatch.

c.

That the use of the falsified dispatch resulted in the prejudice of a third party, or that the
use thereof was with intent to cause such prejudice.

The public officer, to be liable must be engaged in the service of sending or receiving wireless, cable and
telegraph or telephone message

Article 174
FALSIFICATION OF MEDICAL CERTIFICATES, CERTIFCATES OF MERIT OR SERVICE AND THE
LIKE:

3. Good faith is a defense in falsification of public document.

Persons liable:
a.
Physician or surgeon who, in connection with the practice of his profession, issued a false certificate (note: such
certificate must refer to the illness or injury of a person)

Article 173
FALSIFICATION OF WIRELESS, CABLE, TELEGRAPH, AND TELEPHONE MESSAGES, AND USE OF
SAID FALSIFIED MESSAGES

b.

Public officer who issued a false certificate of merit of service, good conduct or similar circumstances

c.

Private individual who falsified a certificate under (1) and (2)

Acts punishable:
1.
Uttering fictitious, wireless, telegraph or telephone message
Requisites:
a.
That the offender is an officer or employee of the government or an officer or employee of a
private corporation, engaged in the service of sending or receiving wireless, cable or
telephone message.
b.

That the accused commits any of the following acts:

uttering fictitious wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message, or
falsifying wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message

Article 175
USING FALSE CERTIFICATES

ELEMENTS:
b.

Falsification of Private Documents

Prejudice to third party is an element of the offense.

Falsification of Public/Official Documents

Prejudice to third persons is immaterial, what is
punished is the violation of public faith and perversion
of truth which the document proclaims.

by any of the person specified in the first paragraph of art. 173.

Rules to observe in the use of a falsified document.
1. It is a crime when knowingly introduced in a judicial proceeding even if there is not intent to cause damage
to another. Knowingly introducing a falsified document in a judicial proceeding, the use alone is not a
crime. The mere introduction of the forged document is the crime itself. But when the falsified document
is knowingly introduced in an administrative proceeding, the use alone is not a crime. There must be
intent to cause damage or damage is actually inflicted.
2. Falsification of document is a separate and distinct offense from that of the use of falsified documents. So if
the falsification of document was done or performed because it was necessary to the use of the same and
in the commission of the crime, then we may have a complex crime defined and punished under Article
48 of the Revised Penal Code.
3. Good faith is a defense in falsification of public document.

Acts punishable:
4.
Uttering fictitious, wireless, telegraph or telephone message
Requisites:
c.
That the offender is an officer or employee of the government or an officer or employee of a
private corporation, engaged in the service of sending or receiving wireless, cable or
telephone message.
d.

5.

d.

6.

That the accused commits any of the following acts:

uttering fictitious wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message, or
falsifying wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message

Using such falsified message

Requisites:
d. That the accused knew that wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message was falsified

f.

That the use of the falsified dispatch resulted in the prejudice of a third party, or that the
use thereof was with intent to cause such prejudice.

The public officer, to be liable must be engaged in the service of sending or receiving wireless, cable and
telegraph or telephone message

Persons liable:
d. Physician or surgeon who, in connection with the practice of his profession, issued a false certificate (note: such
certificate must refer to the illness or injury of a person)
e.

Public officer who issued a false certificate of merit of service, good conduct or similar circumstances

f.

Private individual who falsified a certificate under (1) and (2)

Article 175
USING FALSE CERTIFICATES

That the accused commits any of the following acts:

uttering fictitious wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message, or
falsifying wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message

Falsifying wireless, telegraph or telephone message

Requisites:
c.
That the offender is an officer or employee of the government or an officer or employee of a
private corporation, engaged in the service of sending or receiving wireless, cable or
telephone message.

That the accused used such falsified dispatch.

Article 174
FALSIFICATION OF MEDICAL CERTIFICATES, CERTIFCATES OF MERIT OR SERVICE AND THE
LIKE:

Article 173
FALSIFICATION OF WIRELESS, CABLE, TELEGRAPH, AND TELEPHONE MESSAGES, AND USE OF
SAID FALSIFIED MESSAGES

e.

ELEMENTS:
a. That a physician or surgeon has issued a false medical certificate, or a public officer has issued
a false certificate of merit or service, good conduct, or similar circumstances, or a private
person had falsified any of said certificates.
b.

That the offender knew that the certificate was false.

c.

That he used the same.

Article 176
MANUFACTURING AND POSSESSION OF INTRUMENTS OR IMPLEMENTS FOR FALSIFICATION:

Acts punishable:
a. Making or introducing into the Philippines any stamps, dies or marks or other instruments or
implements for counterfeiting or falsification
b.

Possessing with intent to use the instruments or implements for counterfeiting or falsification
made in or introduced into the Philippines by another person

The implement confiscated need not form a complete set

Constructive possession is also punished

Article 177
USURPATION OF AUTHORITY OR OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS:
2 ways of committing the crime:
a. By knowingly and falsely representing oneself to be an officer, agent or representative of any
department or agency of the Philippine govt or any foreign govt.
b.

By performing an act pertaining to any person in authority or public officer of the Phil govt or
foreign govt under the pretense of such official position, and without being lawfully entitled to
do so.
In usurpation of authority: The mere act of knowingly and falsely representing oneself is sufficient. Not
necessary that he performs an act pertaining to a public officer.

* If the offender commits the acts of usurpation as contemplated herein, and he does it because he is a rebel and
pursuant to the crime of rebellion or insurrection or sedition, he will not be liable under this article because
what is attributed against him as a crime of usurpation is in fact one of the elements of committing rebellion.
* The elements of false pretense is necessary to commit the crime of usurpation of official function.
Article 178
USING FICTITIOUS NAME AND CONCEALING TRUE NAME

Elements

1.

Offender knowingly and falsely represents himself;

2.

As an officer, agent or representative of any department or agency of the Philippine

government or of any foreign government.

In usurpation of official functions: It is essential that the offender should have performed an act
pertaining to a person in authority

Elements

to any person in authority

to any public office

* Foreign government adverted to in this article refers to public officers duly authorized to perform
governmental duties in the Philippines. The law cannot refer to other foreign governments as its application
may bring us to legal problems which may infringe on constitutional boundaries.
OTHER FALSITIES

b.
c.

Offender performs any act;

2.

Pertaining to any person in authority or public officer of the Philippine government or

any foreign government, or any agency thereof;

3.

Under pretense of official position;

4.

Without being lawfully entitled to do so.

A public officer may also be an offender

The act performed without being lawfully entitled to do so must pertain:

a.
to the govt

b.

That he uses that fictitious name publicly.

c.

That the purpose of the offender is

1.
To conceal a crime,
2.
To evade the execution of a judgment, or
3.
To cause damage to public interest. (ex. Signing fictitious name for a passport)

* The name of a person is what appears in his birth certificate. The name of a person refers to his first name,
surname, and maternal name. Any other name which a person publicly applies to himself without authority of
law is a fictitious name.

1.

ELEMENTS (using fictitious name) :

a. That the offender uses a name other than his real name.

ELEMENTS (concealing true name):

a. that the offender conceals

b.

1.

his true name, and

2.

all other personal circumstances.

that the purpose is only to conceal his identity.

* What the offender does to violate or commit this act is for him to conceal his true name and other personal
circumstances. His only motive in doing so is to conceal his identity. In concealment of true name, the
deception is done momentarily, just enough to conceal the name of the offender. In the use of fictitious name, the
offender presents himself before the public with another name.
* A person under investigation by the police who gives a false name and false personal circumstances, upon

being interrogated, is guilty of this crime.

Use of Fictitious Name (178)
Element of publicity must be present
Purpose is to conceal a crime, to evade the execution of a
judgement, or to cause damage

3.
Concealing True Name (178)
Publicity not necessary
Purpose is to conceal identity

Commonwealth Act No. 142 (Regulating the Use of Aliases)

No person shall use any name different from the one with which he was registered at birth in the office of the
local civil registry, or with which he was registered in the bureau of immigration upon entry; or such substitute
name as may have been authorized by a competent court.
Exception: Pseudonym solely for literary, cinema, television, radio, or other entertainment and in athletic
events where the use of pseudonym is a normally accepted practice.
Article 179
ILLEGAL USE OF UNIFORM OR INSIGNIA

That the insignia, uniform or dress pertains to an office not held by the offender or to a class of
persons of which he is not a member.

c.

That said insignia, uniform or dress is used publicly and improperly.

* The wearing of a uniform, or insignia of a non-existing office or establishment is not a crime. It is necessary
that the uniform or insignia represents an office which carries authority, respect, dignity, or influence which the
public looks up to.
> So also, an exact imitation of a uniform or dress is unnecessary; a colorable resemblance calculated to deceive the
common run of people is sufficient.
* The wearing of insignia, badge or emblem of rank of the members of the armed forced of the Philippines or
constabulary (now PNP) is punished by Republic Act No. 493.
* When the uniform or insignia is used to emphasize the pageantry of a play or drama or in moving picture
films, the crime is not committed.

THREE FORMS OF FALSE TESTIMONY

1.
2.

False testimony, defined

It is the declaration under oath of a witness in a judicial proceeding which is contrary to what is true,
or to deny the same, or to alter essentially the truth.
Nature of the crime of false testimony.
1. It cannot be committed through reckless imprudence because false testimony requires criminal intent or
intent to violate the law is an essential element of the crime.
2. If the false testimony is due to honest mistake or error or there was good faith in making the false testimony,
no crime is committed.
Article 180
FALSE TESTIMONY AGAINST A DEFENDANT

ELEMENTS:
a.
That there be a criminal proceeding.

ELEMENTS:
a. That the offender makes use of insignia, uniform or dress.
b.

False testimony in criminal cases under Article 180 and 181;

False testimony in civil case under Article 182;

False testimony in other cases under Article 183.

b.

That the offender testifies falsely under oath against the defendant therein.

c.

That the offender who gives false testimony knows that it is false.

d.

That the defendant against whom the false testimony is given is either acquitted or convicted
in a final judgment (prescriptive period starts at this point)

Requires criminal intent, cant be committed through negligence. Need not impute guilt upon the accused

The defendant must at least be sentenced to a correctional penalty or a fine or must have been acquitted

The witness who gave false testimony is liable even if the court did not consider his testimony

* The probative value of the testimonial evidence is subject to the rules of evidence. It may not be considered at
all by the judge. But whether the testimony is credible or not or whether it is appreciated or not in the context
that the false witness wanted it to be, the crime of false testimony is still committed, since it is punished not
because of the effect it produces, but because of its tendency to favor the accused. (People vs. Reyes)

Penalty is dependent upon sentence imposed on the defendant

Article 181
FALSE TESTIMONY IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANT in a criminal case:
Elements:
1.
A person gives false testimony;
2.

In favor of the defendant;

3.

In a criminal case.

False testimony by negative statement is in favor of the defendant

False testimony need not in fact benefit the defendant

A statement of a mere opinion is not punishable

Conviction or acquittal is not necessary (final judgement is not necessary). The false testimony need not
influence the acquittal

A defendant who voluntarily goes up on the witness stand and falsely imputes the offense to another
person the commission of the offense is liable under this article. If he merely denies the commission of the
offense, he is not liable.

Basis of penalty: gravity of the felony charged against the defendant

Article 182
FALSE TESTIMONY IN CIVIL CASES

ELEMENTS:
a.
That the testimony must be given in a civil case.
b.

That the testimony must relate to the issues presented in said case.

c.

That the testimony must be false.

d.

That the false testimony must be given by the defendant knowing the same to be false.

e.

That the testimony must be malicious and given with an intent to affect the issues presented in
the said case

Not applicable when testimony given in a special proceeding (in this case, the crime is perjury)