Bernardo Vs. People 3475

BERNARDO V. PEOPLE, 123 SCRA 365 (1983) July 5, 1983 Petitioner – Alberto Mala Jr. Respondent – Solicitor General •

FACTS: o Isidro Bernardo was a tenant of Ledda Sta. Rosa in her Riceland in Plaridel, Bulacan during October 1972 until August 1750 o Isidro left (transferred to San Nicolas) without Sta. Rosa knowing, but he transferred his tenancy rights to his son before. o Sta. Rosa filled a case of forcible entry and the Bernardos lost before the Court of First Instance of Bulacan, and then lost before the Court of Appeals o Sta. Rosa sent a letter to demand petitioners to vacate the house and land. But they failed to leave, and a criminal complaint was fled against them in violation of Presidential Decree No. 772 • Presidential Decree 772 of 1975 – Any person who, with the use of force, intimidation or threat, or taking advantage of the absence or tolerance of the landowner, succeeds in occupying or possessing the property of the latter against his will for residential commercial or any other purposes, shall be punished by an imprisonment ranging from six months to one year or a fine of not less than one thousand nor more than five thousand pesos at the discretion of the court, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency. o Petitioners plead not guilty, also filed a motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction of the court to entertain a case for the said violation o Motion to dismiss was denied convicting them to pay a fine of P2,500 each – IN TRIAL COURT

•

ISSUES: oWhether or not the Court of First Instance has jurisdiction to entertain said criminal case when the facts do not constitute a violation of PD 772

•

RULING: oNo, it has no jurisdiction:  From People vs Eschaves • Presidential Decree does not apply to pasture lands because its preamble shows that it was intended to apply to squatting in URBAN COMMUNITIES, or more particularly to illegal construction in squatter areas made by well-to-do individuals

oCertiorari is GRANTED, judgment of conviction is set aside and cased dimissed