Republic of the Philippines

Department of Justice
CITY PROSECUTION OFFICE
Ormoc City

HERBACIO S. DUMANGAS, NPS DOCKET NO. VIII-

Complainant, 04-INV-191-00231

- versus - For:FALSIFICATION BY
PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL AND
USE OF FALSIFIED
DOCUMENTS

EMMANUEL M. MANAGBANAG
EVANGELINE E. MAYO
Respondent.

Date assigned:
Date resolved: 9 October 2019 Promulgated:________
x---------------------------------------------------------------x

RESOLUTION

This resolves the complaint for falsification by private

individual and use of falsified documents filed against
respondents herein Emannuel M. Managbanag and Evangeline
E. Mayo by Herbacio S. Dumangas.

Complainant alleged in the complaint that respondents

has violated the Revised Penal Code, Article 172(1),
“Falsification by private individual and use of falsified
documents”, in relation with Article 171(6), “Making any
alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which
changes its meaning” by submitting the Complaint Judicial
Affidavit before the Office of the Assistant Provincial
Prosecutor, Ormoc City, NPS DOCKET NO. VIII-02g-INV-19F-
00046; and falsely subscribe and swear before Alexander G.
Salas, Jr., of Escalon & Escalon Law Office, Corner Real &
Aviles Streets, Ormoc City, a Notary Public in Ormoc City, duly
appointed, qualified, and acting as such and which Judicial
Affidavits said respondents subscribed and swore, among other
things, facts known to them to be untrue in violation of Article
183 “Perjury”. As proof, that respondents has falsified the
documents and made alteration or intercalation in a genuine
document, complainant attached the alleged False Barangay
Complaint purportedly to support the altered/falsified
MINUTES(Mediation), the Altered/falsified MINUTES(Mediation)

1
showing the caption altered to “Respondent” the Complainant
for Dumangas, and altered to “Complainant” the Respondent
for Evangeline Mayo and added the name of Emmanuel
Managbanag, though Dumangas is the Complainant and Mayo
is the Respondent. Complainant attached as well the Genuine
Minutes of the Mediation showing the truth in the caption that
Herbacio Dumangas is the Complainant and Evangeline Mayo,
alone, is the Respondent; and the Genuine copy of Barangay
Complaint filed by Herbacio Dumangas against Evangeline
Mayo is proof the MINUTES(Mediation) hearing was for the
Complaint of Dumangas versus Mayo.

Respondents in their counter affidavit among others

firmly denied that they have falsified the documents above-
mentioned. Respondents aver that as regards to the barangay
complaint, they filed before the barangay a complaint against
Herbacio S. Dumangas for fencing the dog house of Evangeline
Mayo and the same truly exists and as proof the presented a
certified true copy of the barangay complaint filed by him and
Evangeline Mayo. Likewise, respondents denied the allegation
of complainant that the former have made alterations or
intercalations in the Minutes (Mediation) in issue. Respondents
submit as evidence the a copy of the of the affidavit of
Buenaventura R. Mata, Jr. the barangay chairman which
admitted that he was the one who made the correction in the
said Minutes; and the affidavit of the barangay secretary
confirming the existence of the complaint and the reasons as
to why corrections were made in the said Minutes.

To determine whether or not a person is criminally liable

under the Revised Penal Code for Falsification by Private
Individual and Use of Falsified Documents, it is imperative to
provide evidence purporting to the alleged act.

In the instant complaint, the False Barangay Complaint

and the altered Minutes (mediation) provided by complainant is
overturned by the respondents proof of the that said barangay
complaint indeed is genuine and that the alterations made in
the minutes was in fact a correction by the Barangay Chairman
as supported by the affidavits of the latter admitting the same
and was corroborated by the Barangay Secretary through her
respective affidavit.

After careful perusal of the averments made by

complainant and respondents in their complaint-affidavits and
counter-affidavits, respectively, and of other pieces of evidence
submitted herein, there is no sufficient ground to engender a
well-founded belief that an offense of Falsification by Private

2
Individual and Use of Falsified Documents has been committed
by the respondents.

WHEREFORE, premises considered. Instant complaint is

DISMISSED for lack of evidence to support the finding of
probable cause.

So resolved.
Ormoc City, Philippines.

ERWIN A. PEDROSA
Asst. City Prosecutor
MCLE No. VI-0006194 April 24, 2022
APPROVED BY:

MARCELO C. ONATE
City Prosecutor
MCLE VI No. 0006192. Feb. 5, 2018

Copy Furnished:

Herbacio S. Dumangas – Riverside, Brgy. Poblacion Kananga,

Leyte, Philippines.

Emmanuel M. Managbanag - #253 Juan Luna St., Brgy.

Poblacion Kananga, Leyte, Philippines.

Evangeline E. Mayo - Riverside, Brgy. Poblacion Kananga,

Leyte, Philippines.

Atty. Melchor B. Dumlao – Escalon & Escalon Law Office