‘ANG MUNDO AY ISANG MALAKING QUIAPO’
Theft becomes qualified, under Article 310 of the RPC, when the taking is done with grave abuse confidence
Published in Daily Tribune on June 30, 2022
by: Danica Aurea Cartagena
Merry has a 24/7 grocery store near Recto. Dith, her best friend, is the assistant manager of her store. On Thursday afternoon, Merry, having finished her accounting of yesterday’s profits, discovered that P10,000 was missing. Suspecting that one of her employees stole it from the cash register, Merry decided to watch the CCTV footage of the store — there, she learned that Dith stole the money.
Merry was infuriated, dismayed, and at the same time, confused. She struggled for words to confront Dith. As Merry was about to open the sling doors, a man in his early 20s, opened the sling doors and bumped into her. She looked at the man, and saw he was holding a basket full of grocery items from her store. The man looked at Merry and quickly ran as fast as he could. Merry dialed the police and entered her store. The police answered her call. Merry stopped as she heard Dith’s voice saying “Merry! I was about to call you! There was a thief!.” Merry, breathed deeply, and said, “Tama talaga si Carmi Martin, ang mundo ay isang malaking Quiapo. Maraming snatcher.”
The elements of Theft or simple theft, under Article 308 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) are (1) the taking of personal property; (2) the property belongs to another; (3) the taking away was done with intent of gain; (4) the taking away was done without the consent of the owner; and (5) the taking away is accomplished without violence or intimidation against persons or force upon things.
Theft becomes qualified, under Article 310 of the RPC, when the taking is done with grave abuse confidence. In People v Mejares (2018), the Supreme Court explained that while grave abuse of confidence does not produce felony as an effect, it is a circumstance which aggravates and qualifies the commission of the crime of theft; hence, the imposition of a higher penalty is necessary.
To merit the imposition of a higher penalty, the act of taking must have been made easier by circumstances, such as relations by reason of dependence, guardianship, or vigilance, between the parties, that might create a high degree of confidence which the other party abused. People v. Tanchanco (2012)
From the foregoing, the situation confronting Merry presents two types of theft: (1) Theft or simple theft, committed by the man who took a basket full of grocery items from her store, then ran; and (2) Qualified theft committed by Dith, her best friend and to whom she entrusted her business, who took P10,000 from the cash register without her consent.
When it comes to taking of another person’s property, it is important to note that the scenarios presented are just one of the many ways it can happen.
Depending on how the property is taken, what property is taken, the relationship of the parties and others, the designation, stage, classification of and penalty for the offense will differ.
It is essential to find someone who knows what and when an action may be instituted. No matter how or against whom the offense is committed, find someone who acts in your best interests.
