Silverio v CA; G.R. No. 94284; 08 Apr 1991; 195 SCRA 760

FACTS:
Petitioner was charged with violation of Sec. 20(4) of the Revised Securities Act. He posted bail for his provisional liberty. Two years after a filing of the Information, a motion was filed to cancel the passport of and to issue a hold-departure Order against accused-petitioner on the ground that he had gone abroad several times without the necessary Court approval resulting in postponements of the arraignment and scheduled hearings. The motion was granted.

ISSUE(S):
Whether or not the right to travel may be impaired by lawful order of the court.

RULING:
YES. Holding an accused in a criminal case within the reach of the Courts by preventing his departure from the Philippines must be considered as a valid restriction on his right to travel so that he may be dealt with in accordance with law. The offended party in any criminal proceeding is the People of the Philippines. It is to their best interest that criminal prosecutions should run their course and proceed to finality without undue delay, with an accused holding himself amenable at all times to Court Orders and processes.

Judgment under review is AFFIRMED.

Tags: , ,

Category: Legal Chyme

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *