G.R. No. 94284 Case Digest

G.R. No. 94284, April 8, 1991

Ricardo Silverio, petitioner

vs The Court of Appeals, Hon. Benigno Gaviola as Judge of RTC-Cebu, respondents

Ponente: Melencio-Herrera

Facts:

Silverio was charged with violation of Revised Securities Act. In due time, he posted bail for his provisional liberty. After more than 2 years after filing the information, respondent filed an urgent ex parte motion to cancel the passport of Silverio on the ground that he had gone abroad several times without necessary court approval resulting in postponements of the arraignment and scheduled hearings.

RTC then issued an order directing the DFA to cancel the passport or to deny his application and the Commission on Immigration to prevent Silverio from leaving the country. This RTC finding that Silverio has not been arraigned and never appeared in court on the scheduled date of his arraignment, and Silverio has been going out of the country without the court's knowledge and permission.

Petitioner contends that respondent Court of Appeals erred in not finding that the Trial Court committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction in issuing its Orders, dated 4 April and 28 July 1988, (1) on the basis of facts allegedly patently erroneous, claiming that the scheduled arraignments could not be held because there was a pending Motion to Quash the Information; and (2) finding that the right to travel can be impaired upon lawful order of the Court, even on grounds other than the "interest of national security, public safety or public health."

Held:

(1) Although the date of the filing of the Motion to Quash has been omitted by Petitioner, it is apparent that it was filed long after the filing of the Information in 1985 and only after several arraignments had already been scheduled and cancelled due to Petitioner's non-appearance.

(2) Warrants of Arrest having been issued against him for violation of the conditions of his bail bond, he should be taken into custody. "Bail is the security given for the release of a person in custody of the law, furnished by him or a bondsman, conditioned upon his appearance before any court when so required by the Court or the Rules. The foregoing condition imposed upon an accused to make himself available at all times whenever the Court requires his presence operates as a valid restriction of his right to travel.

Article III, Section 6 of the 1987 Constitution should by no means be construed as delimiting the inherent power of the Courts to use all means necessary to carry their orders into effect in criminal cases pending before them. When by law jurisdiction is conferred on a Court or judicial officer, all auxiliary writs, process and other means necessary to carry it into effect may be employed by such Court or officer.