GIRLIE QUISAY vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, G.R. No.

216920, January 13, 2016

FACTS: The Office of the City Prosecutor filed an information to the RTC charging petitioner for
violation of Section 10 of R.A No. 7610 (Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation
and Discrimination Act). Petitioner moved for the quashal of the Information against her on the ground
of lack of authority of the person who filed the same before the RTC because the resolution was issued
without the approval or authority from the City Prosecutor. As such, the Information must be quashed
for being tainted with a jurisdictional defect that cannot be cured.

The RTC ruled to deny the petitioner’s motion to quash due to lack of merit since it found that the
certification attached to the Pabatid Sakdal has sufficiently complied with Section 4, Rule 112 of the
Rules of Court which requires the prior written authority or approval by, among others, the City
Prosecutor, in the filing of Information. Petitioner then moved for reconsideration but denied. Petitioner
elevated the matter to the CA that consequently, affirmed the ruling of the RTC.

ISSUE: WON the CA correctly held that RTC did not gravely abuse its discretion in dismissing
petitioner’s motion to quash.

HELD: NO. CA erred in affirming CA’s ruling. As a general rule, complaints or information filed
before the courts without prior written authority or approval of the authorized officers renders the same
as defective and therefore subject to quashal. In this case, there was no proof that a certain officer was
authorized to perform the written authority with the approval and in behalf of the City Prosecutor. In
the prior circumstances, the CA erred in affirming RTC’s ruling, that the officer who filed the same
before the RTC had no authority to do so. Thus, Pabatid Sakdal must be quashed resulting in the
dismissal of the criminal case against petitioner. Finally, it must be stressed that the Rules of Court
governs the pleading, practice and procedure in all courts of the Philippines. For an orderly
administration of justice, the provisions contained therein should be followed by all litigants, but
especially by the prosecution arm of the Government.