G.R. No. L-16883 March 27, 1961
DEMETRIO B. ENCARNACION, petitioner, vs. JOSE L. BALTAZAR, Justice of the Peace of San Fernando, Pampanga, and UNION C. KAYANAN, Provincial Fiscal of Pampanga, respondents.

FACTS

An information for serious slander by deed was filed against petitioner Demetrio B. Encarnacion directly with the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Pampanga on December 18, 1958. The CFI assumed jurisdiction, issued a warrant, and granted bail. On August 17, 1959, the CFI issued an order remanding the case to the Justice of the Peace (JP) Court of San Fernando, Pampanga, citing Section 87 of the Judiciary Act as amended by Republic Act No. 2613 . The JP court received the records and, after hearing, denied petitioner’s motion to quash which challenged its jurisdiction. Petitioner argued that since the case was originally filed in the CFI, that court had already acquired exclusive jurisdiction, precluding the JP court from taking cognizance of it.

ISSUE

Whether the Justice of the Peace Court of San Fernando, Pampanga, acquired jurisdiction to try the case after the Court of First Instance of Pampanga, which initially acquired jurisdiction, remanded it.

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the petition for certiorari, ruling that the JP court acted without jurisdiction. The legal logic hinges on the doctrine of concurrent jurisdiction and the rule of exclusion. The crime of serious slander by deed, with a penalty ranging from arresto mayor maximum to prision correccional minimum, fell within the concurrent original jurisdiction of both the CFI and the JP courts in provincial capitals under the amended Judiciary Act ( Republic Act No. 2613 , effective August 1, 1959). The Court applied the settled principle that when several courts have concurrent jurisdiction over the same offense, the court which first acquires jurisdiction over the prosecution retains it to the exclusion of the others. Here, the CFI of Pampanga first acquired jurisdiction upon the filing of the information in December 1958. Consequently, the CFI’s subsequent order of remand to the JP court was invalid. The amendment, which made jurisdiction concurrent, did not empower a court of concurrent jurisdiction to assign a case to another such court; it merely withdrew the CFI’s prior authority to assign cases under the old law. The JP court therefore erred in denying the motion to quash. The Supreme Court made the preliminary injunction permanent and ordered the case returned to the CFI of Pampanga for proper proceedings.