Scribd
Upload
141 views1 page

Batch 2-Case 23-People V Banaga 636 SCRA 202

Rosalie Banaga was charged with 16 counts of qualified theft for failing to deposit money she received as a secretary into bank accounts for landowners and a perpetual care fund. An audit found deficiencies in the amounts deposited. Banaga claimed her signature was forged but admitted during cross-examination that only she possessed a special rubber stamp with her signature. The Supreme Court found her guilty, as her failure to properly deposit the funds she had custody of and an obligation to deposit constituted theft, committed through grave abuse of the confidence placed in her.

Uploaded by

Angelina Villaver Reoja
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
141 views1 page

Batch 2-Case 23-People V Banaga 636 SCRA 202

Rosalie Banaga was charged with 16 counts of qualified theft for failing to deposit money she received as a secretary into bank accounts for landowners and a perpetual care fund. An audit found deficiencies in the amounts deposited. Banaga claimed her signature was forged but admitted during cross-examination that only she possessed a special rubber stamp with her signature. The Supreme Court found her guilty, as her failure to properly deposit the funds she had custody of and an obligation to deposit constituted theft, committed through grave abuse of the confidence placed in her.

Uploaded by

Angelina Villaver Reoja
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

CASE # 23

People v Banaga

FACTS:
Rosalie Banaga was charged with 16 counts of qualified theft.She is a secretary and her duty is
to deposit immediately the money to the corresponding bank book accounts opened and
maintained by the complainants which pertains to their share as landowner’s fund and the share
for the perpetual care fund of said St. John memorial park. Lisondra land, the employer of
Banaga is in partnership with the landowners/complainant. The landowners entrusted to
appellant the responsibility of receiving their share in the gross sales of the lots, and also the
depositing of their share at the Rural Bank of Anda, Pangansinan. Mother of the landowners
noticed the delay, as well as the absence of some amounts. Banaga denied the accusations
and claimed that her signature were forged only.
RTC: Convicted to the several counts of Qualified theft, the highest punishment was 27 years
of RP
CA: Affirmed and only modified some of the penalties applying ISLAW
ISSUE:
WON, Rosalie Banaga committed the crime of Qualified Theft?
RULING:
Yes, she is guilty of the crime of Qualified theft. The testimony given by Araceli who conducted
an audit of the accounts of the landowners is supported by documentary evidence. Banaga did
not rebut this. In fact, her counsel stipulated that the pertinent data stated in Araceli’s audit
report refer to the monthly deficiencies in the amounts to be deposited to the landowner’s
accounts. As to Banaga’s defense of her signature being forged, SC did not appreciate it. Based
on the cross-examination, Banaga actually admitted that she has a special rubber stamp only
made for her and that no one else could forge her signature because she is the only one with
possession of such stamp. Verily, the position held by appellant Banaga in St. John and the
special assignment given to her by the land owners, were vested with trust and confidence. She
had custody of two bank books in which deposits of what she received were to be reflected. Her
failure to account for the subject funds which she was under obligation to deposit constitutes
asportation with intent of gain, committed with grave abuse of confidence reposed on her. CA’s
affirmance of her guilty for qualified theft is proper. Her appeal dismissed.

You might also like