This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
He wa s accused of having misappropriated 4,658 cavans of corn, equivalent to the amou nt of P75,656. A letter was sent to him asking him to pay or otherwise explain t he said shortage. When he was not able to answer said letter, he was terminated. Thenafter, he ask for a shrinkage allowance, since according to his supervisor, the shortage was due to lack of shrinkage allowance. Instead of acting upon sai d request, the RCA chairman filed a case of malversation against him. He was con victed by the public respondent. In doing do, it reasoned out that according to art. 217 of the RPC, failure of an accountable officer to produce money in his c harge upon demand shall be prima facie evidence of malversation? I: Did the conviction of the accused violated his right to be presumed innocent? D: Yes. Although there is a presumption, still, that presumption is rebuttable. The CA did not consider the evidence produced by the accused to rebut such presu mption. Upon review of the said evidence, the Supreme Court held that the accuse d has sufficiently rebutted such presumption. Thus, it is now incumbent upon the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Since th e prosecution failed to do so, the accused is hereby acquitted due to reasonable doubt.