7. AMADO I. SARAUM vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES G.R. No.

205472, January 25, 2016

FACTS: A buy-bust operation was conducted against "Pata." During the operation, "Pata" eluded arrest
as he tried to run towards his shanty. The operatives entered the shanty where Saraum and Esperanza
were holding drug paraphernalia apparently in preparation to have a "shabu" pot session. The
confiscated items were placed in the plastic pack of misua wrapper, and made initial markings. At the
police station, the paraphernalia recovered from Saraum were also marked. After the case was filed, the
subject items were turned over to the property custodian of the Office of City Prosecutor. Saraum denied
the commission of the alleged offense. The RTC find Saraum guilty of the charge which CA affirmed.
On appeal, Saraum questioned the decision of the lower court in finding him guilty of illegal possession
of paraphernalia and the chain of custody of the items seized.

ISSUE: WON the non-compliance with the chain of custody rule render the arrest illegal or the items
confiscated from the accused inadmissible.

HELD: NO. Although Section 21(1) of R.A. No. 9165 mandates that the apprehending team must
immediately conduct a physical inventory of the seized items and photograph them, non-compliance
therewith is not fatal as long as there is a justifiable ground and as long as the integrity and the
evidentiary value of the confiscated/seized items are properly preserved by the apprehending team.
While the procedure on the chain of custody should be perfect and unbroken, in reality, it is almost
always impossible to obtain an unbroken chain. Thus, failure to strictly comply with Section 21(1),
Article II of R.A. No. 9165 does not necessarily render an accused person's arrest illegal or the items
seized or confiscated from him inadmissible.