G.R. Nos.

173654-765             August 28, 2008

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, 

vs.
TERESITA PUIG and ROMEO PORRAS, respondents.

TOPIC: REAL PARTY-IN-INTEREST; Article 1980 and Article 1953

FACTS:

Teresita Puig, cashier and Romeo Poras, Bookeeper were both employees of Rural Bank
of Pototan Inc. in Pototan, Iloilo. They were charged of Qualified Theft of the said bank for conspiring,
confederating, and helping each other willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously take, steal, and carry away
the sum of Php 15,000.00 to the damage and prejudice of the said bank in the aforesaid amount.

RTC dismissed the case since it did not find existence of probable cause on the allegations in the
information. RTC laid down the elements of Qualified Theft, to fall under the crime of Qualified Theft,
the following elements must concur:

1. Taking of personal property;

2. That the said property belongs to another;

3. That the said taking be done with intent to gain;

4. That it be done without the owner’s consent;

5. That it be accomplished without the use of violence or intimidation against persons, nor of
force upon things;

6. That it be done with grave abuse of confidence.

RTC contends that the element of taking be done without the owner’s consent was missing since it should
be the depositors-client who are the owners of the money allegedly taken and not the Bank which filed
the case. Hence, real parties-in-interest. The element of grave abuse of confidence was also missing.
Represented the petitioner People of the Philippines, the Office of the Solicitor General filed before this
court for Review under Rule 45 and praying for the reversal.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the allegations in the informations sufficiently constitute qualified theft.

RULING:

Yes. The relationship between banks and depositors has been held to be that of creditor
and debtor. The Law on loan will govern and not the law on deposit. Article 1980 of the New Civil Code
states that: Fixed, savings, and current deposits of money in banks and similar institutions shall be
governed by the provisions concerning loan. And in Article 1953: A person who receives a loan of
money or any other fungible thing acquires the ownership thereof, and is bound to pay to the creditor an
equal amount of the same kind and quality.

Cashiers, Bookkeeper, and other employees of the bank enjoy the confidence reposed in
them by their employer. Banks, other hand, where monies are deposited are considered the owner thereof.
Bank was correct that it is the real party-in-interest. The court consistently considered the allegations in
the information that such employees acted with grave abuse of confidence to the damage and prejudice of
the bank, without particularly referring to it as owners of the money deposits. Hence, informations were
sufficient to make out of a case of Qualified Theft.