Infidelity of Public Officer

Rodillas vs. Sandiganbayan

161 SCRA 347

FACTS: Accused Rodillas was charged with infidelity in the custody of prisoners. The accused, a police officer, was tasked with the
custody of a detention prisoner charged with the crime of violating the Dangerous Drugs Act. After the hearing, the husband of the
accused sought permission from the accused to have lunch with the detainee. The accused consented. Later on, the detainee asked to
go to the comfort room. After 10 minutes, the accused became suspicious and entered the comfort room. Thereafter, he realized that
the detainee had already escaped.

HELD/RATIO:
The accused was found guilty. In the crime of infidelity in the custody of prisoners, the offender may be liable even if he acted
negligently or even if he did not connive with the prisoner.
It is the duty of any police officer having custody of a prisoner to take necessary precautions to assure the absence of any means of
escape. A failure to undertake these precautions will make his act one of definite laxity or negligence amounting to deliberate non-
performance of duty. His tolerance of arrangements whereby the prisoner and her companions could plan and make good her escape
should have aroused the suspicion of a person of ordinary prudence.