Rule 113, Section 5

Section 5. Arrest without warrant; when lawful. — A peace officer or a private person may, without a
warrant, arrest a person:

(a) When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing,
or is attempting to commit an offense;

(b) When an offense has just been committed, and he has probable cause to believe based
on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has
committed it; and

(c) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal
establishment or place where he is serving final judgment or is temporarily confined while his
case is pending, or has escaped while being transferred from one confinement to another.

In cases falling under paragraph (a) and (b) above, the person arrested without a warrant shall be
forthwith delivered to the nearest police station or jail and shall be proceeded against in accordance
with section 7 of Rule 112. (5a)

Republic Act No. 7438

Article III, Sec 12, Constitution

SECTION 12. (1) Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall
have the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and
independent counsel preferably of his own choice. If the person cannot afford the
services of counsel, he must be provided with one. These rights cannot be waived
except in writing and in the presence of counsel.

(2) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means which vitiate the
free will shall be used against him. Secret detention places, solitary, incommunicado, or
other similar forms of detention are prohibited.

(3) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section 17 hereof shall
be inadmissible in evidence against him.

(4) The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for violations of this section as
well as compensation to and rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices, and
their families.

Rule 112, Section 7

Section 7. When accused lawfully arrested without warrant. — When a person is lawfully arrested
without a warrant involving an offense which requires a preliminary investigation, the complaint or
information may be filed by a prosecutor without need of such investigation provided an inquest has
been conducted in accordance with existing rules. In the absence or unavailability of an inquest
prosecutor, the complaint may be filed by the offended party or a peace office directly with the
proper court on the basis of the affidavit of the offended party or arresting officer or person.

Before the complaint or information is filed, the person arrested may ask for a preliminary
investigation in accordance with this Rule, but he must sign a waiver of the provisions of Article 125
of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, in the presence of his counsel. Notwithstanding the waiver,
he may apply for bail and the investigation must be terminated within fifteen (15) days from its
inception.

After the filing of the complaint or information in court without a preliminary investigation, the
accused may, within five (5) days from the time he learns of its filing, ask for a preliminary
investigation with the same right to adduce evidence in his defense as provided in this Rule. (7a;
sec. 2, R.A. No. 7438)

Rule 114, Section 26

Section 26. Bail not a bar to objections on illegal arrest, lack of or irregular preliminary investigation.
— An application for or admission to bail shall not bar the accused from challenging the validity of
his arrest or the legality of the warrant issued therefor, or from assailing the regularity or questioning
the absence of a preliminary investigation of the charge against him, provided that he raises them
before entering his plea. The court shall resolve the matter as early as practicable but not later than
the start of the trial of the case. (n)

Inquest Proceedings

Inquest is defined as an informal and summary investigation conducted by a public prosecutor

in criminal cases involving persons arrested and detained without the benefit of a warrant of
arrest issued by the court. The inquest serves to determine whether said persons should remain
under custody and correspondingly be charged in court. Because it is summary in nature and
owing to the attendant risk of running against the periods under which detained persons must
be delivered to the proper judicial authorities, an inquest usually ends with either the prompt
filing of an information in court or the immediate release of the arrested person (Leviste vs
Alameda, G.R. 182677, 3 August 2010).

Custodial Investigation

As used in this Act, "custodial investigation" shall include the practice of issuing an "invitation" to a
person who is investigated in connection with an offense he is suspected to have committed, without
prejudice to the liability of the "inviting" officer for any violation of law.