PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION

Preliminary Investigation is an inquiry or proceeding for the purpose of determining whether there is
sufficient ground to engender a well-founded belief that a crime cognizable by the Regional Trial Court has
been committed and that the respondent is probably guilty thereof, and be held for trial. (Sec. 1, Rule 112)

Officers empowered to conduct preliminary investigation:

a. Judges of the Municipal Trial Courts;
b. Judges of the Municipal Circuit Trial Courts;
c. National and Regional State Prosecutors;
d. Provincial or City Prosecutors; and
e. Such other officials that maybe authorized by law like the Tanodbayan, COMELEC lawyers and the
Municipal Mayor in the absence of the Municipal Judge.

Purposes/Objectives of Preliminary Investigation

a. To protect the innocent against hasty, oppressive and malicious prosecution.
b. To secure the innocent from an open and public accusation of trial, from the trouble expense and anxiety
of public trial; and
c. To protect the State from useless and expensive trials (Trocio versus Manata, 118 SCRA 241).

UNIFORM SYSTEM OF PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION

The procedure embodied in Republic Act No. 5189 which provide a uniform system of preliminary
investigation giving the complainant and the respondent in a preliminary investigation the right to confront
and cross-examine each other and their witnesses his “time consuming and not conducive to the expeditious
administration of justice.” As a consequence, Presidential Decree No. 77 as amended by P.D. No. 911 was
issued by former President Ferdinand E, Marcos which amended Sec. 1 of Republic Act No. 5180 which
provides for the procedure for the conduct of preliminary investigation in the following manner:
a. All complainants shall be supported by the verified affidavits of the complaints and its witnesses
accompanied by the other supporting documents. The statements of complaint and witnesses shall be sworn
to before any fiscal or state prosecutor or any government officer authorized to administer oath who would
certify that he has personally examined the affiants and he is satisfied that they voluntarily executed and
understood their affidavits.
b. If the investigating prosecutor finds no probable cause to conduct preliminary investigation, he shall
dismiss the case based on the complaint’s affidavit and documents submitted. If there is a probable cause,
the respondent shall be required to submit the counter affidavit and affidavits of his witnesses, if any, and
other supporting document within ten days (10) from receipt of subpoena. An ex-parte investigation cannot
be subpoenaed or fails to appear during the scheduled hearing despite due notice.
c. The affidavits of the respondent and his witnesses shall also have verified under oath and furnish the
complainant copies of his counter affidavit and other supporting documents.
d. The investigating fiscal shall immediately file the corresponding information in Court if the evidence
establishes a prima facie case; if not, he shall dismiss the case. The investigating fiscal has the discretion to
ask clarificatory questions to the parties and/or their witnesses.
e. The investigating fiscal shall resolved the case within ten (10) days from termination and giving the
parties copies of his resolution starting briefly the findings of facts and the law supporting his action. “The
fiscal or the state prosecutor shall certify under oath in the information to be filed by his that he has
examined the complainant and his witnesses, that on the basis of the sworn statements and other evidence
submitted before him, there is reasonable ground to believe that a crime has been committed and that the
accused is probably guilty thereof, that the accused was informed of the complaints and of the evidence
submitted against him and that he was given an opportunity to submit controverting evidence; Provided,
that no assistant fiscal or state prosecutor may file an information or dismiss a case except with the prior
authority or approval of the Provincial or city fiscal or Chief State Prosecutor: Further, that where an
assistant fiscal or state prosecutor who has investigated the case, recommends the dismissal of the case but
his findings are reversed by the Provincial or City Fiscal or by the Chief State Prosecutor, as the case maybe,
on the ground that prima facie case exists. The Provincialor City Fiscal of the Chief State Prosecutor may,
by him, and on the basis of the same sworn statements and evidence submitted, file the information against
the respondent, or direct any other assistant fiscal or state prosecutor to do so, without conducting another
preliminary investigation; Provided, finally, that where the resolution of the Provincial or City Fiscal of the
Chief State Prosecutor is, upon review, reversed by the Secretary of Justice, the latter may, where he finds
no prima facie case exists, authorized the direct the investigating fiscal concerned or any other fiscal or
state prosecutor to cause or move for the dismissal of the case, or, where he finds a prima facie case, to
cause the filing of an information in court against the respondent, based on the same sworn statements or
evidence submitted without the necessity of conducting another preliminary investigation. (As amended by
PD No. 911)

DUTY OF INVESTIGATING FISCAL

If the investigating fiscal finds cause to hold the respondent for trial, he shall prepare the resolution
and corresponding information. He shall certify under oath that he, or as shown by the record, an authorized
officer, has personally examined the complainant and his witnesses, that there is reasonable ground to
believe that a crime has been committed and that the accused is probably guilty thereof, that the accused
was informed of the complaint and of the evidence submitted against him and that he was given an
opportunity to submit controverting evidence. Otherwise, he shall recommend dismissal of the complaint.
In either case, he shall forward the records of the case including the resolution to the provincial or
city fiscal or chief state prosecutor within five (5) days from his resolution. The latter shall take appropriate
action thereon within ten (10) days from receipt thereof, immediately informing the parties of said action.
No complaint or information may be filed or dismissed by an investigating fiscal without the prior
written authority or approval of the provincial or city fiscal or chief state prosecutor.
Where the investigating assistant fiscal recommends the dismissal of the case but his findings are
reversed by the provincial or city fiscal or chief state prosecutor on the ground that a probable cause exists,
the latter may, by himself, file the corresponding information against the respondent or direct any other
assistance fiscal or state prosecutor to do so, without conducting another preliminary investigation.
If upon petition by a proper party, the Secretary of Justice reverse the resolution of the provincial
or city fiscal or chief state prosecutor, he shall direct the fiscal concerned to file the corresponding
information without conducting another preliminary investigation or to dismiss or move for dismissal of
the complaint or information. (Sec. 4, Rule 112)

DEFINITION OF PROBABLE CAUSE (DEPARTMENT CIRCULAR NO. 42)

“(1) As basis in charging / prosecuting person with and for an offense. Probable cause is the existence of
such facts and circumstances, as would exile the belief, in a reasonable mind, acting on the facts within the
knowledge of the prosecutor that the person charged was guilty of the crime for which he was guilty of the
crime for which he was prosecuted. (Euchanan vs. Vda. De Esteban, 32 Phil. 363; Que vs. Intermediate
Apellate Court, 109 SCRA 137 (1989) “
(2) As ground for an arrest or issuance of a warrant of arrest. Probable cause is such facts and circumstances,
which would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that the person sought to be arrested
has committed an offense. (See Bernas, the Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, a commentary
Vol. 1, first Ed. 1987, pp.86-87)
Probable cause is the knowledge of facts, actual or apparent, strong enough to justify a reasonable man in
the belief that he has lawful grounds for arresting the accused. (34 Words and Phrases 15, citing Mudge vs.
State, 45 N.Y.S. 2nd 296; 901