Está en la página 1de 6

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT


FOURTH JUDICIAL REGION
BRANCH 87
ROSARIO, BATANGAS
THE PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff,

CRIM CASE No.________

-versus-

-for-

___________________________,
VIOLATION OF ARTICLE II
_______________________
SECTION 5 OF REPUBLIC
__________________
ACT 9165 (Comprehensive
Accused.
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002)
x-----------------------------------------------------------x
PETITION FOR BAIL
Accused __________________, by counsel, most respectfully petition
the Honorable Court to grant him bail, upon these considerations:
1.Accused _______________ is charged, together with a certain
_________________ of Violation of Article II, Section 5 of Republic Act
9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002) in an Amended
Information, dated October 23, 2012 and no bail was recommended for their
provisional liberty.
2. The Amended Information is a result of the recommendation made
by the Public Prosecutor Peter A. Beloso, based on a Resolution he rendered,
dated October 23, 2012 on the Preliminary Investigation, finding probable
cause against accused ____________________ for Violation of Article II,
Section 5 of Republic Act 9165, and does not recommend bail for his
provisional liberty.

3. Accused _____________________ was arrested on March 5, 2013,


by virtue of a warrant of arrest issued by the Honorable Court and is
presently detained at the Padre Garcia Police Station.
4. Though the Public Prosecutor found probable cause against accused
________________, it is submitted that the evidence against him is not
strong and therefore he may be granted bail.
5. Section 13, Article III of the 1987 Philippine Constitution provides:
All persons, except those charged with offenses punishable by
reclusion perpetua when evidence of guilt is strong, shall before conviction,
be bailable by sufficient sureties, or be released on recognizance as may be
provided by law. The right to bail shall not be impaired even when the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended, excessive bail shall not
be required.
6. Section 7, Rule 114 of the Revised Rules of Court, likewise
provides:
Capital offense or an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or
life imprisonment, not bailable.-No person charged with a capital offense,
or an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, when
evidence of guilt is strong, shall be admitted to bail regardless of the stage
of the criminal prosecution.
7. It is submitted that the evidence of the prosecution in support of the
charge against herein accused ______________ is not strong as to deny his
constitutional and statutory right to bail. This is clearly shown by the
following considerations:
a.Section 5, Article II of Republic Act 9165 (Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002) provides:
Sale, Trading, Administration, Dispensation, Delivery, Distribution
and transportation of Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled Precursors and
Essential Chemicals- The penalty of life imprisonment to death and a fine
ranging from Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) to Ten million
pesos (P10,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person, who, unless
authorized by law, shall sell, trade, administer, dispense, diliver, give away
to another, distribute dispatch in transit or transport any dangerous drugs,

including any and all species of opium poppy regardless of the quantity and
purity involved, or shall act as a broker in any such transactions
XXX
b. It is apparent from the foregoing paragraph, that in order for an
accused to be convicted under Section 5, he must have either: sold, traded,
administered, dispensed, delivered, gave away, distributed or transported
dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals; or
must have acted as a broker in any such transactions; and the same must be
proven beyond reasonable doubt based on evidence.
c. None of the object evidence taken after the buy-bust operation
conducted by the operatives of the Padre Garcia Police on August 19, 2012
was the product of a sale, trade, administation, dispensation, distribution or
transportation done or made by accused ______________________.
d. The only evidence linking accused _____________________ to the
instant case are the statements made by the operatives of Padre Garcia Police
that he was in conspiracy with accused ____________________ in selling
the shabu, because it was him who handed to the latter the heat-sealed
transparent plastic sachet, containing methamphetamine hydrochloride,
which in turn was sold to the poseur buyer.
e. Statements like this given by the operatives themselves should be
treated with caution and must be considered with outmost care. They must
not be given the simple convenience of alleging conspiracy. The existence of
conspiracy, just like the crime itself must be proven beyond reasonable
doubt.
f. Accused ______________ do not deny being at the house of
____________________ when the buy-bust operation was conducted on
August 19, 2012. It is a situation of being at the wrong place at the wrong

time. But mere presence at the premises where the buy-bust operation was
conducted does not make one automatically a conspirator. If indeed he
participated as stated by the operatives, he could have been arrested together
with accused ___________________.
g.

The

statements

made

by

the

operatives

that

accused

__________________ handed accused ___________________ the heatsealed plastic containing shabu and sold to the poseur buyer, which
somehow gives the situation a color of conspiracy, defies logic and contrary
to ordinary course of things which is readily observable. One question
always

stands

out:

Why

is

there

need

for

accused

______________________ to summon accused _______________ and


require from the latter a heat-sealed plastic sachet containing the shabu,
when according to the operatives themselves they frisked the former after he
was arrested and the search yielded one transparent plastic sachet containing
white crystalline substance, suspected to be shabu and three pieces
transparent plastic sachet (tea bag) suspected to be containing dried leaves of
marijuana?

There

is

no

logical

need

or

reason

for

accused

_________________ to require from accused ____________________ the


heat-sealed plastic sachet containing shabu because the former have with
him available quantity as alleged by the operatives and evidenced by the
object evidence seized from the body of _______________________ after
the buy-bust operation.
h. Unless the prosecution proves that the evidence of guilt against
accused ______________________ is strong, accused is entitled to right to
bail enshrined and guaranteed by our statutes and Constitution.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed of
this

Honorable

Court

to

grant

herein

accused-movant

______________________ bail for his provisional liberty and to fix the


same in an amount in cash or surety as it may deemed suffient.

Batangas City for Rosario, Batangas, March 8, 2013.


RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
MANALO & CLEMENO
LAW OFFICES
Counsel for Accused Raymund Perez
1st Flr. N. Sangalang Bldg.
C. Tirona St., Batangas City
By:

RICARDO B. MANALO II
Roll No. 43030
IBP No. 873272 Dec 28, 2012
PTR No. 1833670 Jan. 2, 2013 Batangas City
MCLE Exemption No. III-000657
December 16, 2009
The Branch Clerk of Court
Regional Trial Court
Branch 87
Pros. Peter A. Beloso
Office of the Provincial Prosecutor
Rosario, Batangas
GREETINGS:
Please be notified that the foregoing Petition for Bail will be
submitted by the undersigned on March 14, 2013 at 2:00 oclock in the
afternoon, or as soon thereafter as counsel and matter may be heard.
March 8, 2013.
RICARDO B. MANALO II
Copy furnished:

Pros. PETER A BELOSO


Office of the Provincial Prosecutor
Rosario, Batangas