6. Re: Anonymous letter-complaint against Hon.

Marilou Runes-Tamang, Presiding Judge, MeTC Pateros, Metro

Manila and Presiding Judge, MeTC San Juan, Metro Manila
AM MTJ-04-1558 / April 7, 2010 / Per Curiam
Topic: Bail; Where to file; S17(a)R114
Doctrine:
1. The bail bond may be filed with the court where the case is pending, or with any RTC of the place of arrest, or with
any RTC with any MeTC or MTC of the place of arrest.
2. All applications for bail and judicial bonds shall be coursed through the clerk of court who shall see to it that the bonds
are in order every bond shall be accompanied by a clearance from the SC showing that the issuing company is qualified
to transact business, which clearance is valid only for 30 days from the date of its issuance.
Facts:
1. An investigation revealed that Judge Tamang (MeTC Judge in Pateros and San Juan) approved bail bonds issued by
Covenant Assurance Co. despite Covenant being blacklisted since 2002. Judge Tamang had approved the bail bonds
without any showing of the unavailability of all the RTC Judges in Pasig, considering the accused persons were
charged in criminal cases pending before the RTC in Pasig and is detained in Pasig City Jail.
2. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) made its findings that:
a. In Mandaluyong City 3 criminal cases, wherein bail bonds were secured in San Juan and approved by Judge
Tamang, notwithstanding the presence and availability of the Judges in RTC Mandaluyong City whose courts
the cases are pending
b. In RTC Pasig considerable number of criminal cases were approved despite the same violation. And most
of the bonds were secured thorugh Covenant Inc.
c. Recommendation: to file an administrative complaint against Judge Tamang, subject her to disciplinary
proceedings, declare all bail bonds secured from Covenant as Null and Void.
3. Judge Tamang, upon such findings, claims innocence and conducted an investigation and thus cited the following:
a. That such was the practice of the pervious judge of the MeTC in San Juan wherein the cases involved were
pending in RTC and MeTC Pasig City, Quezon City and Mandaluyong City
b. 14 orders of release were issued at 6pm on Fridays, when there were no available judges in the other courts
c. Some cases involved the accused being held in San Juan but the case was pending in Pasig City
d. There was a cover-up done by the court personnel of the MeTC in San Juan wherein they did not give copies
of the orders of Judge Ynaga of RTC Pasig City
4. OCA included the Clerk of Court Sorio and Process Server Medrano included as respondents.
5. Judge Manalastas of the RTC in Pasig City found no evidence of bad faith, dishonesty or deliberate intent to do
injustice on the part of Judge Tamang, but rather she be held liable for gross negligence, while the co-respondents
guilty of grave misconduct.
Issue: Did Judge Tamang competently act in approving the questioned bail bonds?
Held: No
In accepting surety bond, the Clerk of Court should see to it that the ff requisites are complied with, otherwise, the
bond should be rejected:
o Photographs of the accused
o Affidavit of justification
o Clearance from the SC
o Certificate of compliance with the Circular from the Office of the Insurance Commissioner
o Authority of Agent
o Current certificate of Agent
o Procedure
All applications for bail/judicial bonds, before their approval by the judge concerned, shall be
coursed thru the Clerk of Court or his duly authorized personnel who shall see to it that the bond is
in order and the signature of the bonding officer authentic before affixing his signature thereto. He
shall also indicate therein the outstanding liability of the bonding company, if any, for the
information and guidance of the court.
Judge Tamang approved the bail bonds issued by Covenant although they lacked the required clearance from the SC
indicating that Covenant was qualified to transact business with the courts.
o Covenant was blacklisted at the time of issuance of the bail bonds
o Judge Tamang was guilty of neglect of duty because she is still bound to review the supporting documents
before approving the bail bonds
o Considering the seriousness of the purpose in the posting of bail bond, approval thereof should pass through
strict scrutiny and with utmost caution on the part of both the Clerk of Court and the approving Judge.
Sec 17 (a), Rule 114 ROC governs the approcal of bail bonds for criminal cases pending OUTSIDE the judges
territorial jurisdiction
o Sec 17. Bail, where filed. (a) Bail in the amount fixed may be filed with the court where the case is pending,
or in the absence or unavailability of the judge thereof, with any regional trial judge, metropolitan trial
judge, municipal trial judge, or municipal ciruit trial judge in the province, city, or municipality. If the accused
is arrested in a province, city or municipality other than where the case is pending, bail may also be filed
with any Regional Trial Court of said place, or if no judge is available, with any metropolitan trial judge,
municipal trial judge, or municipal circuit trial judge therein.
o Under this provision, the bail bond may be filed either:
With the court where the case is pending, or
With any RTC of the place of arrest, or
(if no judge is available) with any MeTC or MTC of the place of arrest.
o The list of approved bail bonds involved accused detained in Pasig City, Taguig City, San Juan and Pateros
Judge Tamang contends that the accused voluntarily surrendered at San Juan therefore could apply
for bail in San Juan
She was correct in approving the application for bail of the accused who voluntarily
surrendered detained in San Juan, Pateros and Taguig, because Sec7(a) granted her
authority to approve applications for bail of the accused detained within her territorial
jurisdiction, in the event of the unavailability of any RTC judge in the area. (there was still no
RTC judge stationed in San Juan and Pateros)
However, she did not substantiate here approved bail application of the accused in Pasig
City. She offered no proof to justify her approval of the questioned bond.