ART - 167 COUNTERFEITING, IMPORTING AND UTTERING

INSTRUMENT NIOT PAYABLE TO BEARER

Any person who shall forge, import or utter, in connivance with the forgers
or importers, any instrument payable to order or other document of credit
not payable to bearer, shall suffer the penalties of prision correccional in
its medium and maximum periods and a fine not exceeding P6,000 pesos.

PUNISHABLE ACTS:

1. Forging instruments payable to order or documents of credit not

payable to bearer;
2. Importing such false instruments; and
3. Uttering such false instruments in connivance with the forger or the
importer.

NOTE: Connivance is not required in uttering if the utterer is the forger.

ELEMENTS:

1. That there be an instrument payable to order or other document of

credit not payable to bearer
2. That the offender either forged , imported or uttered such instrument
3. That in case of uttering he connived with the importer or forger

JURISPRUDENCE:

The falsification of U.S. treasury warrants not payable to bearer is

punished under Art. 172, not under Art. 167. (People vs. Loteyro, C.A., 50
O.G. 632)

The prosecution for uttering forged U.S. treasury warrants was

made under Art. 166. (People vs. Esteban, et al., C.A., 55 O.G. 3510)

Forgery of currency is punished so as to maintain the integrity of the

currency and thus insure the credit standing of the government and
prevent the imposition on the public and the government of worthless
notes or obligations. (People vs. Galano, C.A, 54 O.G. 5897)

The utterer should not be the forger. If the utterer was the one who
forged the instrument payable to order, obviously connivance is not
required, for he can be held liable as a forger of the instrument. (People vs.
Orqueza, 14 C.A. Rep. 730)

ART 168 - ILLEGAL POSSESSION AND USE OF FALSE TREASURY OR

BANK NOTES AND OTHER INSTRUMENTS OF CREDIT

Unless the act be one of those coming under the provisions of any of the
preceding articles, any person who shall knowingly use or have in his
possession, with intent to use any of the false or falsified instruments
referred to in this section, shall suffer the penalty next lower in degree
than that prescribed in said articles.

ELEMENTS:

1. That the treasury or bank note or certificate or other obligation and

certificate payable to bearer or any instrument payable to order or
other document of credit not payable to bearer is forged or falsified by
another
2. The offender knows that any of these instrument is forged or falsified
3. That he performs any of these acts:
a. Using any of such forged or falsified instruments
b. Possession with intent to use, any of the forged or falsified
documents

JURISPRUDENCE:

For it to constitute an offense under Article 168 of the RPC, the

possession must be with intent to use said false treasury or bank notes
(Clement v. People,G.R. No. 194367, June 15, 2011)

Possession of false treasury or bank notes alone are not a criminal

offense. For it to constitute an offense under Article 168 of the Penal Code,
the possession must be with intent to use said false treasury or bank notes.
Hence, it follows that an information alleging possession of false treasury
and bank notes without alleging intent to use the same but only "intent to
possess" them, charges no offense. (People vs. Digoro, G.R. No. L-22032,
March 4, 1966)
 Evidence must be presented that the number which the questioned
bank note bears does not check with the genuine one issued with the
same number. (People vs. Barraquia, 76 Phil. 490)

Where the accused in aiding his brother to utter a counterfeit bank

note was not aware of its counterfeit character, he was not guilty of illegal
possession and use of false bank note. (U.S. vs. De Leon, et al., 4 Phil. 496)

Intent to use is sufficient to consummate the crime when the

offender is in possession of false or falsified obligations or notes. Although
the bogus P100-bill was not accepted by the person to whom it was
handed in the course of a transaction (it was offered in payment of 10
chickens), the crime is consummated. (People vs. Santos, C.A., 47 O.G.
3587)

ART 169 - HOW FORGERY IS COMMMITTED

The forgery referred to in this section may be committed by any of the

following means:

1. By giving to treasury or bank note or any instrument payable to bearer

or to order the appearance of a true and genuine document
2. By erasing, substituting, or altering by any means the figures, letters,
words or signatures contained therein

ELEMENTS:

1. By giving to treasury or bank note or any instrument payable to bearer

or to order the appearance of a true and genuine document
2. By erasing, substituting, or altering by any means the figures, letters,
words or signatures contained therein

NOTE: Includes falsification and counterfeiting

JURISPRUDENCE:

It had the effect of erasing the phrase “or his order” upon the face of
the warrant. There was material alteration on a genuine document (US v.
Solito, G.R. No. L-12546, August 25, 1917).
 The accused admitted that he signed the name "A. Lobster" on each
of the checks in question, without having any authority to do so. As a
matter of fact, that name was chosen by the accused as part of the
deception, without knowing whether there was in fact a living person
bearing that name. (People vs. Orqueza, 14 C.A. Rep. 730)

The forgery consists in the addition of a word in an effort to give to

the present document the appearance of the true and genuine certificate
that it used to have before it was withdrawn or has outlived its usefulness.
( People vs. Galano, C.A., 54 O.G. 5899)

ART 170 - FALSIFICATION OF LEGISLATIVE DOCUMENT

The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period and a fine not
exceeding P6,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any person who, without
proper authority therefor alters any bill, resolution, or ordinance enacted
or approved or pending approval by either House of the Legislature or any
provincial board or municipal council.

ELEMENTS:

1. That there be a bill, resolution or ordinance enacted or approved by

either House of the Legislative or any provincial board or municipal
council
2. The offender alters the same
3. That he has no proper authority therefor; and
4. That alteration changed the meaning of the document

NOTE:

Art. 170 punish "any person who, without proper authority therefor,
alters any bill," etc. Hence, other acts of falsification, even in legislative
document, are punished either under Art. 171 or under Art. 172.

Republic Act No. 248 prohibits the reprinting, reproduction or

republication of government publications and official documents without
previous authority.
ART 171 - FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC OFFICER, EMPLOYEE OR
NOTARY OR ECCLESIASTICAL MINISTER

The penalty of prision mayor and a fine not to exceed P5,000 pesos shall
be imposed upon any public officer, employee, or notary who, taking
advantage of his official position, shall falsify a document by committing
any of the following acts:

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 in fact so participate;
3. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding
statements other than those in fact made by them;
4. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;
5. Altering true dates;
6. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which
changes its meaning;
7. 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
a copy a statement contrary to, or different from, that of the genuine
original; or
8. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in
a protocol, registry, or official book.

The same penalty shall be imposed upon any ecclesiastical minister who
shall commit any of the offenses enumerated in the preceding paragraphs
of this article, with respect to any record or document of such character
that its falsification may affect the civil status of persons.

ELEMENTS:

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

2. That he takes advantage of his official position
a. He has the duty to make or prepare or otherwise to
intervene in the preparation of the document
b. He has the official custody of the document which he
falsifies
3. The offender falsifies a document by
i. COUNTERFEITING OR IMITATING ANY HANDWRITING,
SIGNATURE OR RUBRIC
 a. That there be an intent to imitate or an attempt to
imitate
b. The two signature or handwriting, the genuine and the
forged bear some resemblance to each other

ii. CAUSING IT TO APPEAR THAT PERSONS HAVE PARTICIPATED IN

AN ACT OR PROCEEDING
a. that the offender caused it to appear in a document that
a person or persons participated in an act or proceeding
b. that such persons did not in fact so participate in the
action proceeding

iii. ATTRIBUTING TO PERSONS WHO HAVE PARTICIPATED IN ANY

ACT OR PROCEEDING STATEMENTS OTHER THAN THOSE IN
FACT MADE BY THEM
a. that persons participated in an act or proceeding
b. that such person or persons made statements in that act
or proceeding
c. that the offender in making a document, attributed to
such person, statements other than those in fact made
by such person.

iv. MAKING UNTRUTHFUL STATEMENTS IN A NARRATION OF

FACTS
a. That the offender makes in a document statements in a
narration of facts
b. That he has the legal obligation to disclose the truth of
the facts narrated by him
c. That the facts narrated by the offender are absolutely
false
d. That the perversion of truth in the narration of facts was
made with the wrongful intent of injuring a third person

v. ALTERING TRUE DATES

a. Date must be essential.
 b. The alteration of the date or dates in a document must
affect either the veracity of the document or the effects
thereof.
c. Alteration of dates in official receipts to prevent
discovery of malversation is falsification

vi. MAKING ALTERATION OR INTERCALATION IN GENUINE

DOCUMENT WHICH CHANGSE ITS MEANING
a. That there be an alteration or intercalation (insertion) on
a document
b. That it was made on a genuine document
c. That the alteration and intercalation has changed the
meaning of the document
d. That the changes made the document speak something
false

vii. ISSUING IN AN AUTHENTICATED FORM A DOCUMENT

PURPORTING TO BE A COPY OF AN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT
WHEN NO SUCH ORIGINAL EXIST OR INCLUDING IN SUCH A
COPY A STATEMENT CONTRARY TO OR DIFFERENT FROM THAT
OF THE GENUINE ORIGINAL
a. Cannot be committed by a private individual or by a notary
or public officer who does not takes advantage of his
official position.
b. Intent to gain or prejudice is not necessary

viii. INTERCALATING ANY INSTRUMENT OR NOTE RELATIVE TO THE

ISSUANCE THEREOF IN A PROTOCOL, REGISTRY OR OFFICIAL
BOOK.

4. 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.

JURISPRUDENCE:
 When the accused certified she was eligible for the position, she
practically wrote a conclusion of law. Hence, she may not be declared
guilty of falsification because Art. 171 punishes untruthful statements in
narration of facts (People v. Yanza, G.R. No. L-12089, April 29, 1960).

“Legal obligation” means that there is a law requiring the disclosure

of the truth of the facts narrated. Bernante may not be convicted of the
crime of falsification of public document by making false statements in a
narration of facts absent any legal obligation to disclose where he would
spend his vacation leave and forced leave (Enemecio v. Office of the
Ombudsman [Visayas], G.R. No. 146731, Jan. 13, 2004).

In falsification of public or official documents, it is not necessary that

there be present the idea of gain or the intent to injure a third person
because in the falsification of a public document, what is punished is the
violation of the public faith and the destruction of the truth as therein
solemnly proclaimed (Galeos v. People, G.R. Nos. 174730-37, February 9,
2011)

. In falsification of a public document, it is immaterial whether or not

the contents set forth therein were false. What is important is the fact that
the signature of another was counterfeited. In a crime of falsification of a
public document, the principal thing punished is the violation of public
faith and the destruction of the truth as therein solemnly proclaimed.
Thus, intent to gain or injure is immaterial. Even more so, the gain or
damage is not necessary (Caubang v. People, G.R. No. L-62634 June 26,
1992).

An assistant bookkeeper who, having bought several articles for

which he signed several chits, intentionally did not record in his personal
account most of the said chits and destroyed them so that he could avoid
paying the amount thereof is guilty of falsification by omission (People v.
Dizon, G.R. No. 22560, January 29, 1925).

ART. 172 - FALSIFICATION BY PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS AND USE OF

FALSIFIED DOCUMENTS

 The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods

and a fine of not more than P5,000 pesos shall be imposed upon:

1. Any private individual who shall commit any of the falsifications

enumerated in the next preceding article in any public or official
 document or letter of exchange or any other kind of commercial
document; and
2. Any person who, to the damage of a third party, or with the intent to
cause such damage, shall in any private document commit any of the
acts of falsification enumerated in the next preceding article.

Any person who shall knowingly introduce in evidence in any judicial

proceeding or to the damage of another or who, with the intent to cause
such damage, shall use any of the false documents embraced in the next
preceding article, or in any of the foregoing subdivisions of this article,
shall be punished by the penalty next lower in degree.

PUNISHABLE ACTS AND ELEMENTS:

1. Falsification of public, official or commercial document by a private

individual
a. 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
c. That the falsification was committed in a public or official or
commercial document

2. Falsification of private document by any person

a. That the offender committed any of the acts of falsification except
those in par. 7, enumerated in Art.171.
b. That the falsification was committed in a private document.
c. That the falsification caused damage to a third party or at least the
falsification was committed with the intent to cause damage

3. Use of falsified documents

a. Introducing in a judicial proceeding-
i. that the offender knew that the document was falsified
by another person
ii. that he false document was embraced in Art. 171 or in
any subdivisions No.1 or 2 of art. 172
iii. that he introduced said document in evidence in any
judicial proceeding
 b. Use in any other transaction-
i. That the offender knew that the document was falsified
by another person
ii. That the false document was embraced in Art. 171 or in
any of subdivision No. 1 or 2 of Art. 172
iii. That he used such document (not in judicial
proceeding)
iv. That the use of the false document caused damage to
another or at least it was used with intent to cause
damage

JURISPRUDENCE:

In a prosecution for estafa, demand is not necessary where there is

evidence of misappropriation or conversion. The accused may be
convicted of the felony under Article 315, paragraph 1(b) of the Revised
Penal Code if the prosecution proved misappropriation or conversion by
the accused of the money or property subject of the information.
Moreover, the falsification of a public, official, or commercial document
may be a means of committing estafa, because before the falsified
document is actually utilized to defraud another, the crime of falsification
has already been consummated, damage or intent to cause damage not
being an element of the crime of falsification of public, official or
commercial document.Therefore, the falsification of the public, official or
commercial document is only a necessary means to commit the estafa.
(People of the Philippines v. Jose Go, et. al)

Public document — a document created, executed or issued by a

public official in response to the exigencies of the public service, or in the
execution of which a public official intervened. (U.S. vs. Asensi, 34 Phil.
765)

Official document — a document which is issued by a public official

in the exercise of the functions of his office. An official document is also a
public document. It falls within the larger class called public documents.
(U.S. vs. Asensi, supra)

Private document - a deed or instrument executed by a private

person without the intervention of a notary public or other person legally
authorized, by which document some disposition or agreement is proved,
evidenced or set forth. (U.S. vs. Orera, 11 Phil. 596)
 Commercial document — any document defined and regulated by
the Code of Commerce (People vs. Co Beng, C.A., 40 O.G. 1913) or any
other commercial law.