37. Crespo vs. Mogul G.R. No.

53373, June 30, 1987

Facts:
A  case of estafa against Crespo   was filed on April 18,1977  at the circuit criminal court  of
Lucena city. When it was set for arraignment , Crespo filed a motion to defer arraignment as there was a
pending petition for review  filed  with the Secretary of Justice. 

Undersecretary Macaraig  resolved the petition and  directed fiscal to move for dismissal  of the
information filed against the accused. Judge denied the motion and set the arraignment of the case. 

Issue:

Whether  the trial court acting  on a motion to dismiss a criminal case  file by the Provincial
Fiscal upon recommendation of the Secretary of  Justice, may refuse to grant  the motion and  proceed on
the arraignment  and trial on the merits

Ruling:

Yes, the trial court acting on a motion  may refuse to grant the motion  and proceed  on the
arraignment and trial on the merits

Once a complaint  or information  is filed in Court  any disposition  of the case as its dismissal or
the conviction or acquittal of the accused rests in the sound discretion of the Court.

The fiscal  cannot  insist  on his opinion . A motion to dismiss  the case filed by fiscal  should be
addressed to the court  who may grant or deny it.

DO NOT WRITE:
v Once an information is filed in court, the court’s prior permission must be secured if
fiscal wants to reinvestigate the case.