THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, plaintiff-appellee, vs. VICENTE P. CASTRO and PEDRO A. PACANA, defendants-appellants; G.R. No. L-22642 December 19, 1924

Ignorance or mistake as to particular facts, honest and real, will as a general rule, exempt the doer from criminal responsibility. The exception, of course, is neglect in the discharge of a duty or indifference to consequences, which is equivalent to criminal intent. The element of malicious intent is supplied by the element of negligence and imprudence.

Facts:

1. These are five related criminal cases for the crimes of falsification of public documents and estafa committed by means of falsification of public documents, in which the accused are Pedro A. Pacana, secretary of the provincial board of Misamis, Isidro Adorable, member of the provincial board of Misamis, and Vicente P. Castro, member of the provincial board of Misamis.

2. The charge in the first numbered case against Pedro A. Pacana relates to the falsification by the accused of minutes of the meeting of the provincial board on June 9, 1923, for the alleged purpose of permitting the district engineer to incur illegal expenses in the reconstruction of a provincial road.

3. The charge in the second case against the same accused relates to the falsification of minutes of the provincial board on June 16, 1923.

4. The charge in the third case against the same accused relates to the falsification of an excerpt from the minutes of the provincial board of June 9, 1923.

5. And the last two cases, one against provincial board member Isidro Adorable and Pedro A. Pacana, and the other against provincial board member Vicente P. Castro and Pedro A. Pacana, relate to the crimes of estafa committed by means of falsification of public documents, whereby it is alleged Adorable and Castro were each able to collect the sum of P25 as per diems for two fictitious meetings of the provincial board.

ISSUE: 

Whether or not there was an intentional and deliberate falsification of public documents on the part of the accused or whether there was merely a human error committed, in which criminal intent was wholly lacking?

HELD:

The Court held that there was merely an error committed in which criminal intent was wholly lacking. Thus, the accused were acquitted of the charges laid against them.

The evidence of record closely examined and found that, instead of meetings of the provincial board of Misamis being held on June 9 and June 16, 1923, as appeared in the minutes, meetings were in reality held on June 19 and June 21, 1923. There was merely an error committed in which criminal intent was wholly lacking.

Ordinarily, evil intent must unite with an unlawful act for there to be a crime. Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea. There can be no crime when the criminal mind is wanting. Ignorance or mistake as to particular facts, honest and real, will, as a general rule, exempt the doer from criminal responsibility.

If the inculpatory facts and circumstances are capable of two or more explanations, one of which is consistent with the innocence of the accused of the crime charged and the other consistent with their guilt, then the evidence does not fulfill the test of moral certainty and is not sufficient to support a conviction.