ORIANO MATA, petitioner

v. JOSEPHINE K. BAYONA, respondent

G.R. No. 50720, March 26, 1984

FACTS: The petitioner challenged the validity of the search warrant issued by the
respondent judge for failure to comply with the requisites of the
Constitution and for violating the Rules of Court. This is in relation
to the mere application for search warrant and a joint affidavit of private
respondents which was the basis for the respondent judge
to issue said warrant. Allegedly, the judge failed to attach the necessary
papers relevant to the issuance of the search warrant to the
criminal records of the petitioner as accused on the selling of illegal
tickets on the Jai Alai game in the absence of any authority from the
Philippine Jai Alai and Amusement Corporation or from the
government authorities concerned.
This has compelled the petitioner to file a motion to quash and annul the
search warrant and for the return of the articles seized, citing and
invoking, among others, Section 4 of Rule 126 of the Revised
Rules of Court and eventually denied by the respondent judge
stating that the court has made a thorough investigation and
examination under oath of the members of the Intelligence Section of
Police District II INP. The judge also made a premise that the documents
were not attached immediately, the issue being immaterial as there
are no rules which specify when these documents are to be attached
to the records. The Motion for Reconsideration of the
petitioner was denied. Hence, this petition seeking that the court
declare the search warrant to be invalid and that all the articles
confiscated be inadmissible as evidence in the case or in any
proceedings on the matter.

ISSUE: Whether or not the search warrant is valid

RULING: No. The search warrant is invalid for being illegal in violation to the
Constitution and the Rules of Court. The affidavits of the complainant and
the witnesses do not suffice. It was ruled that the judge had to take
depositions in writing of the complainant and the witnesses he may
produce and attach them to the record. This should be done in
order that the judge may be able to properly determine the existence
or nonexistence of the probable cause and to possibly hold
liable for perjury the person giving it if the declarations be
found false.

The judge failed to conform with the essential requisites of taking the
depositions in writing and attaching them to the record. Arising from this
failure is the question or speculation that the certification was
made belatedly to cure the defect of the warrant? The SC then held that
the search warrant in question is illegal and that the return of the things
seized cannot be ordered. The possession of which is prohibited
according to the ruling held in the case of Castro v.
Pabalan.