PEOPLE vs.

EFREN MIRANDA

Efren Miranda, postmaster of Cantillan, Surigao, was charged with the malversation of public funds
through falsification of public documents in that on five different occasions and dates, he allegedly
falsified and made alterations in his records of collections and payments and official cash books, to
make it appear that more sums were paid out by him on telegraphic transfers and money orders to
contain persons than those actually disbursed, and then as appropriated and converted the difference
to his own use and benefit, to the damage and prejudice of the national government. He moved to
dismiss the case on the ground that within 24 hours after the discovery of the supposed
malversations, he reimbursed or made good the missing amounts, thereby negativing criminal intent
on his part, and that whatever criminal liability he had incurred was extinguished by such
reimbursements. The RTC sustained the motion and dismissed the case. Issue: WON the sustainment
of the motion to quash and the order of dismissal was proper. Held: No. In malversation of public funds or
estafa, payment, indemnification, or reimbursement of, or compromise as to, the amounts or funds malversed
or disappropriated, after the commission of the crime, affects the civil liability of the offender but does not
extinguish his criminal liability because both crimes are public offenses against the People that must be
prosecuted and penalized by the Government. Assuming that the Miranda had fully reimbursed or returned the
amounts he supposed to have malversed, still his criminal liability is not extinguished. While Miranda alleged in
his motion to quash at his having returned the amounts missing in his accounts before the filing of this case
negatives criminal intent on his part, and that the falsifications and malversations charged against him are
actually nothing more than honest mistakes or errors in the entries or computations made by him in his books
and records, such facts constitute at most a defense against the charges against him which he must prove at
the trial; but does not constitute valid ground for the dismissal of this case at a stage when trial has not even
began and the prosecution has not yet started presenting its evidence. Even assuming that the
reimbursements made by the accused Miranda had extinguished any criminal liability he might have incurred
for malversation, there is still the charge of falsification of public documents embodied in the same information.
He may still be found guilty of the lesser crime of falsification of public documents, which is necessarily
included in the complex crime of malversation through falsification of public documents charged.