Remedial Law

Ma. Hazelina Tujan-Militante vs Raquel Cada-Deapera

Can't share this digest on Facebook? Here's why.

image_printPrint this!

G.R. No. 210636 – 739 Phil. 785 – 731 SCRA 194 – Remedial Law – Special Proceedings – Rule 102; Petition for Habeas Corpus – A.M. No. 03-04-04-SC; Custody of Minors – Summons not required in habeas corpus cases – Enforceability of Writ of Habeas Corpus

Raquel Cada-Deapera filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus against Ma. Hazelina Tujan-Militante before the Regional Trial Court of Caloocan. The court issued a writ of habeas corpus and the Sheriff, since Hazelina was not in her Caloocan residence, tendered a copy at her residence. The subject of the writ was minor Criselda Cada.

Hazelina now questions the jurisdiction of RTC Caloocan as she alleged that she was never issued a summons and that she and the subject minor are residents of Quezon City.

ISSUE: Whether or not the Caloocan RTC has jurisdiction.

HELD: Yes. Service of summons is not required in habeas corpus cases. A writ of habeas corpus plays a role somewhat comparable to a summons, in ordinary civil actions, in that, by service of said writ, the court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the respondent.

Section 20 of A.M. No. 03-04-04-SC or the Rules on Custody of Minors and Habeas Corpus in Relation to Custody of Minors provides that the writ of habeas corpus issued by the Family Court, or in its absence, the RTC, shall be enforceable within its judicial region. Quezon City and Caloocan are within the same judicial region.

Read full text.

image_printPrint this!

Leave a Reply