Quindao and Urbano

G.R. No. 117970 July 28, 1998

Adherence of Jurisdiction or Continuing Jurisdiction, Exception

PEOPLE V. CAWALING
July 28, 1998 G.R. No. 117970 PANGANIBAN, J.:
Recit Ready Synopsis
The case involve accused-appellants Mayor Cawaling and four policemen who shot dead one Ronie
Elisan at the ricefield of Poblacion on the evening of December 1982. The accused pleaded NOT
GUILTY before the RTC for the crime of murder which conviction was later affirmed. Aggrieved by the
RTC decision, the accused petitioned before the Court contending that RTC has no jurisdiction to hear
the case on the ground that accused-appellants are public officials and employees. The Court in
applying doctrine of adherence of jurisdiction, held that RTC is not barred from hearing the case
because RTC HAD ACQUIRED such jurisdiction before the subsequent passing of the new legislation
placing such jurisdiction to another tribunal. 
Legal Provisions/Concepts/Doctrines and How Applied to the Case
Doctrine of Adherence of Jurisdiction - once jurisdiction is vested in the court, it is retained up to the
end of the litigation. It remains with the court until the case is finally terminated.

FACTS
1. On December 4, 1982, at 9:00 PM at the ricefield of Poblacion, San Jose, Odiongan, Romblon
five accused-appellants, Mayor Ulysses Cawaling, and four policemen armed with .45
caliber and armalites, shot dead and assaulted one Ronie Elisan. The incident was
witnessed by the victim’s brother Vicente Elisan who hid behind the coconut tree about twenty
(20) meters from the bushes where the victim fell down.
2. Prior to the shooting the five accused-appellants, with one Alex Batuigas the mayor’s brother-in-
law, were allegedly watching the victim from outside the C & J-4 Kitchenette in Poblacion while
the victim and his brother Vicente Elisan were drinking tuba.
3. An administrative case was filed by the victim’s brother, Nelson Elisan, before the National
Police Commission in which Policemen (1) Ernesto Tumbagahan, (2) Ricardo De los Santos, (3)
Hilario Cajilo and one Andres Fontamillas were found guilty of grave misconduct and was
dismissed from the service with prejudice.
4. Subsequently on June 4, 1987, an information for criminal case was filed by Second Assistant
Provincial Fiscal Alexander Mortel before the RTC of Romblon charging the accused-appellants
with murder in which the latter pleaded NOT GUILTY. After the due trial, on October 21, 1994,
the RTC rendered the accused-appellants GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of MURDER
under the information filed before them.
5. Aggrieved by the decision, the appellants through their counsel, petitioned before the Supreme
Court opposing the RTC’s decision namely -9.) The lower court committed an error in not
dismissing the case for want of jurisdiction- arguing that it must be dismissed on the ground
that the Sandiganbayan has the original jurisdiction to hear cases involving public officers or
employees (appellants being mayor and policemen) who committed an offense in the exercise of
their duties.

ISSUE/S (relevant to the syllabus)

1. WHETHER OR NOT Regional Trial Court erred in assuming jurisdiction over the case wherein
new legislation places such proceedings under the jurisdiction of another tribunal namely
Sandiganbayan.

RULING
1. NO, the RTC did not err in assuming jurisdiction and CORRECTLY heard the case.
The Supreme Court held that the jurisdiction of a court to try a criminal case is determined by
the law in force at the time of the institution of the action. Once the court acquires jurisdiction,
it may not be ousted from the case by any subsequent events, such as new legislation
placing such proceedings under the jurisdiction of another tribunal.
Since RTC has the proper jurisdiction at the time the action was instituted, it cannot be barred
from hearing the case without prejudice to the newly enacted legislation subject to exceptions
(1) there is an express provision in the statute, or (2) the statute is clearly intended to
apply to actions pending before its enactment

NOTE
Worthy to note that criminal case was instituted on June 4, 1987.
On February 15, 1997, through RA 8249, PD 1606 was amended placing such jurisdiction to hear the
case under the cloak of Sandiganbayan. Such legislation was enacted 10 years from the time the case
was instituted.