PADERANGA vs DRILON

Personal determination by a Judge

PADERANGA vs DRILON

FACTS:

Definition of Preliminary Examination – Generally inquisitorial, often only means of discovering the persons who may be reasonably charged with a crime, to enable the fiscal to prepare his complaint or information.

The institution of a criminal action depends upon the sound discretion of the Fiscal. He has the quasi-judicial discretion to determine wither or not a criminal case should be filed in Court.

General Rule:

Injunction will not be granted to restrain a criminal prosecution

Exception (Brocka vs Enrile):

1.       Afford adequate protection to the constitutional rights of the accused

2.       Necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of actions

3.       When there is a prejudicial question

4.       When the acts of the officers are without or excess of authority

5.       Double jeopardy is clearly apparent

6.       When the Court has no jurisdiction over the offense

7.       A case of persecution rather than prosecution

8.       The charges are manifestly false and motivated by vengeance

9.       Clearly no Prima Facie case against the accused

The right of the accused to ask clarificatory questions is not ABSOLUTE.

QUANTUM OF EVIDENCE required in preliminary investigation is such such evidence sufficient to “engender” a well-founded belief as to the fact of the omission of a crime and respondents probable guilt.