REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR
ILOILO CITY
ROBERT C. ROBLES,
Complainant
-versus- Criminal Case # 12345
For: Reckless
Imprudence
Resulting to Damage
to Property and
Serious Physical
Injuries
NAPOLEON P. SILAYAN,
Respondent
COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT
I, NAPOLEON P. SILAYAN, Filipino, of legal age, with postal address
at Lopez Jaena Street, Jaro, Iloilo City, after being sworn in
accordance with law, do hereby depose and state that:
1. I am the respondent (hereafter referred to as “Respondent”) in
this case for alleged commission of the crime of Reckless
Imprudence Resulting in Damage to Property and Serious
Physical Injuries under Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code.
2. The complainant is in connection with the injuries sustained by
Robert C. Robles (hereafter referred to as “Complainant”),
resulting from an accident that happened at around 12:00 in the
morning of May 1, 2023, along Diversion Road Iloilo, near Injap
Tower Hotel.
3. On May 1, 2023, at around 12:00 in the morning, I was driving
my 2020 Nissan Navarra with Plate No. BEF 431 on my way
home to Jaro, Iloilo City.
4. I deny the allegation in paragraph 4 of the complaint for
erroneous and false accusation.
5. I honestly believe that this case filed against me must be
dismissed based on the following discussions:
The complainant failed to establish all the elements of the crime
of Reckless Imprudence defined under Article 365 of the RPC.
6. The complainant fatally failed to establish all the elements of
Reckless Imprudence as defined under Article 365. Reckless
imprudence is defined as follows:
“Art. 365. Imprudence and negligence. –
xxx Reckless imprudence consists in voluntarily, but without malice,
doing or failing to do an act from which material damage results by
reason of inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the person
performing or failing to perform such act, taking into consideration his
employment or occupation, degree of intelligence, physical condition
and other circumstances regarding persons, time and place. xxx”
7. In Cruz vs. Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court enumerated
the elements of Reckless Imprudence, to wit:
“The elements of reckless imprudence are: (1) that the offender does
or fails to do an act; (2) that the doing or the failure to do that act is
voluntary ; (3) that it be without malice; (4) that material damage
results from the reckless imprudence; and (5) that there is
inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the offender, taking into
consideration his employment or occupation, degree of intelligence,
physical condition, and other circumstances regarding persons, time
and place.”
8. In order for Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Damage to
Property and Serious Physical Injuries, it is essential that there
must have been an act that was done with inexcusable lack of
precaution.
9. In the instant case, there was no finding that the I failed to
exercise the necessary precaution in driving the vehicle. There
was no report that the I was overspeeding nor was violating any
traffic rules at the time the accident happened. Complainant’s
claim that I am very fast and reckless was just a self-serving
statement. Additionally, the term “very fast and reckless” is
relative. The vehicle might be very fast and reckless for him but
the truth is, I was driving within the speed limit.
The evidence submitted does not meet the required quantum of
evidence by law to establish a prima facie case.
10. In Paderanga vs Drilon, the Supreme Court stated that
“[t]he quantum of evidence now required in preliminary
investigation is such evidence sufficient to "engender a well
founded belief as to the fact of the commission of a crime and
the respondent's probable guilt thereof . A preliminary
investigation is not the occasion for the full and exhaustive
display of the parties' evidence; it is for the presentation of such
evidence only as may engender a wen grounded belief that an
offense has been committed and that the accused is probably
guilty thereof.”
11. In the instant case, what has just been presented to this
Honorable Office is a TRAFFIC ACCIDENT REPORT which did
not provide any information that would show that I drove the car
recklessly. Hence , the evidence presented cannot engender a
well-founded belief that I drove recklessly and that I was
imprudent in driving my vehicle.
12. From the above discussion, I respectfully submit that the
only course open for this Honorable Office is to dismiss the
complaint against me, for the rule is that “when at the outset the
evidence cannot sustain a prima facie case or the existence of
probable cause to form a sufficient belief as to the guilt of the
accused cannot be ascertained, the prosecution must desist
from inflicting on any person the trauma of going through a
trial.”
13. With all the foregoing, it is respectfully implored that this
Honorable Office forthwith dismiss the instant Complaint for lack of
factual and legal basis.
14. I have caused the execution of the foregoing affidavit and do
hereby to attest to the truth of the declarations herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 26 th day
of May 2023 in Iloilo City, Philippines.
________________________
NAPOLEON P. SILAYAN
PROSECUTOR’S CERTIFICATION
SUBSCRIBED and SWORN to before me this 26th day of May 2023,
in Iloilo City. I hereby certify that I personally examined the affiant,
and am satisfied that he voluntarily executed and understood this
Counter-Affidavit.
GAZINI GANADOS
Prosecutor III
City Prosecutor’s
Office
IBP Lifetime Member
No. 228676
Roll No. 18877
