Castro v. Pabalan

Summary

This certiorari case challenged the validity of a search warrant issued by Judge Pabalan upon application by PC Sgt. Lumang against petitioners Castro and Co Ling. The Supreme Court found the search warrant constitutionally and procedurally defective for three reasons: failure to establish probable cause through specific factual allegations, lack of particular description of items to be seized, and violation of the Rules of Court requirement limiting warrants to one specific offense. Despite these defects, the Court sustained the lower court's order retaining contraband items while directing return of personal effects, applying the established doctrine that illegally seized contraband need not be returned as possession thereof is prohibited by law. The decision reinforced strict compliance with constitutional search and seizure protections.