G.R. Nos.

159017-18 March 9, 2011 The counsel for the late Mayor also filed its Motion for
Reconsideration alleging that the death of the late
PAULINO S. ASILO, JR., Petitioner, Mayor had totally extinguished both his criminal and
vs. civil liability. The Sandiganbayan granted the extinction
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES and Spouses of the criminal liability is concerned and denied the
VISITACION AND CESAR C. BOMBASI, Respondents. extinction of the civil liability holding that the civil
action is an independent civil action.
x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
Hence, these Petitions for Review on Certiorari.
G.R. No. 159059
ISSUE
VICTORIA BUETA VDA. DE COMENDADOR, IN
REPRESENTATION OF DEMETRIO T. 1. WON the accused is guilty of violating RA 3019
COMENDADOR,Petitioner, 2. WON the actual damages prayed for is
vs. unconscionable
VISITACION C. BOMBASI AND CESAR C.
BOMBASI, Respondents. DECISION

PEREZ, J.: 1. The Supreme Court sustain the Sandiganbayan

in its finding of criminal and civil liabilities against
FACTS OF THE CASE petitioner Asilo and petitioner Mayor Comendador.

Private Respondent Visitacion’s late mother Marciana The elements of the offense are as follows: (1) that the
Vda. De Coronado (Vda. De Coronado) and the accused are public officers or private persons charged
Municipality of Nagcarlan, Laguna entered into a lease in conspiracy with them; (2) that said public officers
contract whereby the Municipality allowed the use and commit the prohibited acts during the performance of
enjoyment of property comprising of a lot and a store their official duties or in relation to their public
in favor of the respondent’s mother for twenty years, positions; (3) that they caused undue injury to any
extendible for another 20 years. The lease contract party, whether the Government or a private party;
provided that the late Vda. De Coronado could build a (4) OR that such injury is caused by giving
firewall on her rented property which must be at least unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference to the
as high as the store; and in case of modification of the other party; and (5) that the public officers have acted
public market, she or her heir/s would be given with manifest partiality, evident bad faithor gross
preferential rights. Visitacion took over the store when inexcusable negligence.
her mother died Visitacion secured the yearly Mayor’s
permits. Clearly, the demolition of plaintiff’s store was carried
out without a court order, and notwithstanding a
A fire razed the public market of Nagcarlan. Upon restraining order which the plaintiff was able to obtain.
Visitacion’s request for inspection, District Engineer The demolition was done in the exercise of official
Gorospe of the then Ministry of Public Works and duties which apparently was attended by evident bad
Highways, found that the store of Visitacion remained faith, manifest partiality or gross inexcusable
intact and stood strong. This finding of Engineer negligence as there is nothing in the two (2)
Gorospe was contested by the Municipality of resolutions which gave the herein accused the
Nagcarlan. The store of Visitacion continued to operate authority to demolish plaintiff’s store.
after the fire.
The accused public officials were devoid of any power
The Sangguniang Bayan of Nagcarlan, Laguna issued to demolish the store. A closer look at the contested
Resolution No. 183 authorizing Mayor Comendador to resolutions reveals that Mayor Comendador was only
demolish the store being occupied by Visitacion using authorized to file an unlawful detainer case in case of
legal means. Mayor Comendador relying on the resistance to obey the order or to demolish the
strength of Sangguniang Bayan Resolution Nos. 183 building using legal means. Clearly, the act of
and 156 authorized the demolition of the store with demolition without legal order in this case was not
Asilo and Angeles supervising the work. among those provided by the resolutions, as indeed, it
is a legally impossible provision.
Visitacion, filed with a case for damages before the
RTC. Spouses Bombasi, thereafter, filed a criminal 2. The amount of actual damages prayed for is
complaint21 against Mayor Comendador, Asilo and unconscionable.
Angeles for violation of Sec. 3(e) of Republic Act No.
3019 otherwise known as the "Anti-Graft and Corrupt To seek recovery of actual damages, it is necessary to
Practices Act" before the Office of the Ombudsman. prove the actual amount of loss with a reasonable
Sandiganbayan rendered a decision, finding the degree of certainty, premised upon competent proof
accused Demetrio T. Comendador and Paulino S. Asilo, and on the best evidence obtainable. n this case, the
Jr. guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violation of Sec. Court finds that the only evidence presented to prove
3(e) of Republic Act. No. 3019. the actual damages incurred was the itemized list of
damaged and lost itemsprepared by Engineer Cabrega,
an engineer commissioned by the Spouses Bombasi to
estimate the costs.

The amount claimed by the respondent-claimant’s

witness as to the actual amount of damages "should
be admitted with extreme caution considering
that, because it was a bare assertion, it should
be supported by independent evidence."
Whatever claim the respondent witness would
allege must be appreciated in consideration of
his particular self-interest. There must still be a
need for the examination of the documentary
evidence presented by the claimants to support
its claim with regard to the actual amount of
damages. The price quotation made by Engineer
Cabrega presented as an exhibit partakes of the
nature of hearsay evidence considering that the
person who issued them was not presented as a
witness.