Filing Theft Charges and Prescriptive Periods under Philippine Law

(All statutory references are to the Revised Penal Code [RPC] of 1930, as amended—most recently by Republic Act No. 10951, 29 August 2017—and to related special laws and Supreme Court decisions up to 2 June 2025.)

1 What Counts as “Theft” in the Philippines?

Provision	Key Rule	Important Notes
Art. 308 (Simple Theft)	“Any person who, with intent to gain and without violence against or intimidation of persons nor force upon things, takes personal property belonging to another without the latter’s consent…”	• “Personal property” need not be tangible, but it must be capable of appropriation and have monetary value. • “Intent to gain” (animus lucrandi) is presumed from unlawful taking; the presumption may be rebutted.
Art. 310 (Qualified Theft)	If committed by domestic servant; with grave abuse of confidence; involving motor vehicle, mail matter, large cattle, coconuts from plantation, fish from fishpond; or during calamity.	Penalty: two degrees higher than that for simple theft of the same amount.
Art. 311 (Theft of the Property of the National Library or National Museum)	Special aggravation; penalty one degree higher.
Art. 308, ¶2 (Check Encashment Variant)	Encashing a check stolen from the drawer is theft, not estafa.

Distinction from Robbery (Art. 293): robbery requires violence/intimidation or force upon things; mere stealth or trickery is theft.

2 Elements to Be Proven

Personal property belongs to another.
Taking (apoderamiento): offender acquires possession and control—even momentarily.
Without the owner’s consent.
Intent to gain (animus lucrandi).
Absence of the qualifying circumstances that would make the act robbery or another offense.

3 Penalties After R.A. 10951

The 2017 amendments adjusted the value brackets to inflation. The tables below give the basic penalties for simple theft; use the two-degrees-higher rule for qualified theft.

Value stolen	Prescribed penalty (Simple Theft)	Range (Years, Months & Days)
≤ P5,000	Arresto menor or arresto mayor (Art. 309 ¶2)	1 day – 6 months or 1 month 1 day – 6 months
> P5,000 – ≤ P20,000	Arresto mayor (medium–maximum)	2 months 1 day – 6 months
> P20,000 – ≤ P600,000	Prisión correccional (min.–med.)	6 months 1 day – 4 years 2 months
> P600,000 – ≤ P1,200,000	Prisión correccional (max.) – prisión mayor (min.)	4 years 2 months 1 day – 8 years
> P1,200,000 – ≤ P2,200,000	Prisión mayor (med.–max.)	8 years 1 day – 12 years
> P2,200,000	Prisión mayor (max.) to reclusión temporal (min.)	12 years 1 day – 17 years 4 months

*(When computing penalties for qualified theft, climb two full degrees: e.g., if basic penalty is prisión correccional max.–prisión mayor min., the qualified theft penalty is prisión mayor max.–reclusión temporal med.)*

4 Prescriptive Periods: When Does Theft “Expire”?

4.1 Prescription of the Crime (Art. 90–91)

Penalty Attached	Classification	Crime prescribes in…
Afflictive (≥ reclusión temporal)	Afflictive	20 years
Correctional (prisión correccional, arresto mayor)	Correctional	10 years
Light (arresto menor, fine ≤ P40,000)	Light	2 months

Key points in computing: • The prescriptive period begins on the day the crime is discovered by the offended party, the authorities, or their agents—not necessarily the date of taking. • Interruption: running is suspended when (a) a complaint or information is filed with the prosecutor’s office or the courts; (b) the offender is absent from the Philippines. It resumes when proceedings terminate without conviction/acquittal or when the offender returns. • A criminal information filed within the prescriptive period—but later amended only as to form—relates back; if amendment changes the nature of the charge, a fresh prescription analysis applies (e.g., from theft to qualified theft). • For continuing offenses (e.g., concealment of stolen property), prescription runs from the last overt act.

4.2 Prescription of the Penalty (Art. 92–93)

Once the accused is convicted and the judgment becomes final, the State’s power to enforce the sentence can itself prescribe:

Penalty imposed	Penalty prescribes in…
Reclusión temporal and up	20 years
Prisión mayor	15 years
Prisión correccional	10 years
Arresto mayor	5 years
Arresto menor	1 year
Fine ≤ P40,000	1 year

Running is suspended while the convict is “outside Philippine territory.”

5 Step-by-Step: How to File Theft Charges

Secure evidence & valuation. Inventory the items, keep receipts/appraisals, and gather CCTV footage, correspondence, or witness statements.
Report to police or directly to the National Prosecution Service (NPS).
- Inquest (if suspect is under custody for a recent, hot-pursuit arrest).
- Regular preliminary investigation (if suspect is at-large or surrendered).
Prepare a Complaint-Affidavit: narrate facts clearly; attach documentary and object evidence; state estimated value.
Prosecutor’s resolution: may dismiss, downgrade, or elevate to qualified theft; aggrieved parties may file a motion for reconsideration or petition for review (DoJ).
Informations filed in the proper Metropolitan/Regional Trial Court based on penalty.
Issuance of warrant or summons. Bail is generally allowed except where penalty could reach reclusión perpetua and evidence of guilt is strong (rare for theft unless extremely high value and qualified circumstances).
Arraignment → Pre-trial → Trial → Decision.

6 Civil Liability and Restitution

The offended party is automatically a private complainant; the court will rule on restitution, reparation, or indemnification (Art. 104–107 RPC, Art. 100 Civil Code).
A separate civil action is impliedly instituted with the criminal case unless the complainant waives, reserves, or files first in a civil court (Rule 111, Rules of Criminal Procedure).
Restitution of stolen property is preferred; if impossible, return of equivalent value plus interest is ordered.

7 Defenses & Mitigating Circumstances

Defense	When Viable	Effect
Owner’s consent	Borrowed property or mistaken belief of consent.	Absolves liability.
Lack of intent to gain	Temporary taking (e.g., prank) with intent to return.	No theft.
Case of necessity	Taking food to avoid starvation (rarely accepted).	May exempt under Art. 12 ¶4.
Exemption for relatives (Art. 332)	Theft committed against spouse, ascendants, descendants, or relatives by affinity within same line, and brothers/sisters living together.	Exempt from criminal liability (only civil). Not applicable to strangers or qualified theft.
Prescription	Crime or penalty filed/enforced beyond periods above.	Bars prosecution or enforcement.

8 Special Topics & Recent Jurisprudence

Cyber-related takings. Appropriation of e-wallet funds via unauthorized transfers has been prosecuted as qualified theft (grave abuse of confidence over intangible property), in tandem with the Cybercrime Prevention Act (R.A. 10175) for computer-related fraud.
Employer–Employee Trust Cases. SC rulings (e.g., Beduya v. People, G.R. 227806, 17 Jan 2022) reaffirm that misappropriation of employer’s cash by a rank-and-file cashier is qualified theft, not estafa, because the employee merely has physical/material possession, not juridical possession.
Prescription Clarified. In People v. Dizon (G.R. 205822, 26 Apr 2021), the Court held that the filing of a barangay complaint (Katarungang Pambarangay) does not interrupt prescription; only filing with the prosecutor’s office or a court does.
Effect of R.A. 10951 on Pending Cases. The adjusted value thresholds are retroactive if favorable to the accused (Art. 22 RPC); thus many pre-2017 cases have had penalties reduced or re-classified—altering prescriptive periods.
Double Jeopardy & Amendments. People v. Lacson (G.R. 155076, 10 May 2013) made clear that a dismissal/archiving provisionally without notice to the accused is void; a new case within prescription is still possible.

9 Practical Tips for Victims & Practitioners

Act promptly: secure surveillance copies before they auto-delete; prescription can run quickly for low-value theft.
Charge stacking? When violence surfaces, consider filing robbery or robbery with homicide; prosecutors cannot convict of robbery on a theft information absent allegation of violence.
Venue matters: theft is a transitory offense—locus criminis is where the taking occurred or where the property was unlawfully brought; choose the venue most convenient for witnesses.
Asset-freezing: in high-value cases, apply ex parte for a hold departure order (HDO) and precautionary hold-departure order (PHDO) under A.M. 18-07-05-SC to stop flight.
Corporate victims: Board resolution or Secretary’s Certificate is needed to authorize the complainant-officer.
Insurance payout: does not bar criminal action; insuree must still cooperate lest the insurer subrogate.

10 Checklist for Computing Prescription (Sample Scenario)

Scenario: P1 million is stolen by an employee (qualified theft discovered on 15 July 2022). Complaint-affidavit is filed with the prosecutor on 10 August 2024. The suspect flees abroad on 1 September 2024 and returns 1 February 2025.

Penalty: Qualified theft two degrees above prisión correccional max.–prisión mayor min. ⇒ prisión mayor max.–reclusión temporal med. (afflictive).
Crime prescribes in 20 years.
Clock runs 15 Jul 2022 → 10 Aug 2024 (2 years 26 days).
Interrupted by filing with prosecutor on 10 Aug 2024.
Resumes only if case dismissed without conviction or if the information is not filed before dismissal; time abroad does not matter because clock already suspended.
Penalty once final will prescribe in 20 years, but the period will only start after the convict evades service.

11 Conclusion

Understanding theft under Philippine law requires tracking three moving parts:

Value of the property (determines the basic penalty);
Qualifying circumstances (can instantly raise penalty by two degrees); and
Time (prescription of the offense and of the penalty).

Quick, decisive action—backed by solid evidence and timely filing—protects both the victim’s property rights and the State’s power to prosecute. Conversely, counsel for the accused must scrutinize value brackets, amendments, and procedural timelines, because a single day’s delay or a missing jurisdictional fact can spell acquittal.

With the 2017 monetary adjustments and the surge in digital theft modalities, practitioners should keep their penalty tables up to date, remain vigilant about prescriptive cut-off points, and leverage both technological trails and traditional documentary proof to secure (or defeat) theft prosecutions in 2025 and beyond.