Article 172 of the Revised Penal Code: Falsification by a private individual
Status: Amended
Amended
This provision has been amended. The text below is the current version.
- Amended by: Republic Act No. 10951 (Wording as amended by this law.)
What does Article 172 say?
The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods and a fine of not more than One million pesos (P1,000.000) shall be imposed upon:
1. Any private individual who shall commit any of the falsifications enumerated in the next preceding article in any public or official document or letter of exchange or any other kind of commercial document;
2. Any person who, to the damage of a third party, or with the intent to cause such damage, shall in any private document, commit any of the acts of falsification enumerated in the next preceding article; and
3. Any person who shall knowingly introduce in evidence in any judicial proceeding or to the damage of another or who, with the intent to cause such damage, shall use any of the false documents embraced in the next preceding article, or in any of the foregoing subdivisions of this article, shall be punished by the penalty next lower in degree.
What does it mean in plain language?
Article 172 punishes falsification of documents by private persons, and the use of falsified documents. A private person who falsifies a public, official or commercial document, or who falsifies a private document to cause damage, faces prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods (2 years, 4 months and 1 day to 6 years) and a fine of up to ₱1,000,000. Knowingly using a falsified document carries the penalty next lower in degree.
The current text comes from Republic Act No. 10951 (2017), which raised the fine. The three cases it covers:
- Any private individual who shall commit any of the falsifications enumerated in the next preceding article in any public or official document or letter of exchange or any other kind of commercial document;
- Any person who, to the damage of a third party, or with the intent to cause such damage, shall in any private document, commit any of the acts of falsification enumerated in the next preceding article; and
- Any person who shall knowingly introduce in evidence in any judicial proceeding or to the damage of another or who, with the intent to cause such damage, shall use any of the false documents embraced in the next preceding article, or in any of the foregoing subdivisions of this article, shall be punished by the penalty next lower in degree.
How does it work in real life?
Toni: a fake signature on a government certificate
Toni, a private person, imitates the signature of a government official on a certificate that the official's office issues. Counterfeiting a signature is one of the acts in Article 171, and an official document is covered by paragraph 1 of Article 172, even if Toni did not mean to harm anyone.
Gab: an altered receipt
Gab changes the amount on a private receipt to collect more money from his business partner. A receipt between private parties is a private document, so paragraph 2 needs damage to the partner or intent to cause it.
Liza: uses a fake certificate
Liza knows her friend's employment certificate is fake but submits it in a court case to support her claim. Knowingly introducing a falsified document in evidence falls under paragraph 3, with the penalty next lower in degree.
What does this mean in practice?
- The type of document matters. Public, official and commercial documents are treated more strictly than private ones.
- Falsification and [estafa](/law/glossary/estafa) can overlap. A fake document is sometimes used to get money. See estafa.
- Deadlines. The time limits for filing a criminal case are in Article 90; see prescription of crimes.
- Records. A pending criminal case can affect clearances; see NBI hit status.
What acts count as falsification?
Article 172 does not list the acts itself. It refers to "the next preceding article", Article 171, which lists eight ways to falsify a document:
- Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when they did not in fact so participate;
- Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements other than those in fact made by them;
- Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;
- Altering true dates;
The other acts are counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric; making an alteration or intercalation in a genuine document that changes its meaning; issuing in authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an original when no such original exists, or a copy that differs from the original; and intercalating any instrument or note in a protocol, registry or official book.
What are the penalties?
| Case | Penalty | Length or amount |
|---|---|---|
| Private person falsifies a public, official or commercial document (par. 1) | Prision correccional, medium and maximum periods, and a fine | 2 years, 4 months and 1 day to 6 years; fine of not more than ₱1,000,000 |
| Any person falsifies a private document, to the damage of a third party or with intent to cause damage (par. 2) | Same | Same |
| Knowingly using a falsified document, or introducing it in evidence in court (par. 3) | Penalty next lower in degree | Set by the court |
| Public officer, employee or notary who falsifies a document taking advantage of his official position (Article 171) | Prision mayor and a fine | 6 years and 1 day to 12 years; fine not exceeding ₱1,000,000 |
Lengths come from the Article 76 table; see the table of the duration of penalties.
Who is a "private individual" under Article 172?
In Garong v. People (2016), the Supreme Court listed the elements of falsification by a private individual under paragraph 1: (1) the offender is a private individual, or a public officer or employee who did not take advantage of his official position; (2) the offender committed any of the acts in Article 171; and (3) the falsification was committed in a public, official or commercial document. In that case, a court interpreter who simulated a court order was convicted under Article 172 in relation to Article 171.
Is intent to cause harm needed?
It depends on the document:
- Public, official or commercial documents. No. In Typoco v. People (2017), the Supreme Court said that in falsification of public documents, intent to gain or to injure a third person is not necessary, because "what is punished is the violation of the public faith and the destruction of the truth as therein solemnly proclaimed."
- Private documents. Yes. Paragraph 2 requires that the falsification be "to the damage of a third party, or with the intent to cause such damage".
What did Republic Act No. 10951 change?
Republic Act No. 10951 (2017) raised the fine in Article 172 to not more than ₱1,000,000. The prison penalty did not change. Older decisions that mention much lower fines applied the law before 2017; their fines are not today's amounts.
Frequently asked questions
What is the penalty for falsification of documents by a private person?
Under Article 172 as amended by Republic Act No. 10951, prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods (2 years, 4 months and 1 day to 6 years) and a fine of not more than ₱1,000,000. Using a falsified document is punished by the penalty next lower in degree.
What acts count as falsification?
Article 172 refers to the eight acts listed in Article 171, such as counterfeiting a signature, making it appear that someone took part in an act when he did not, making untruthful statements in a narration of facts, and altering true dates.
Is it falsification if nobody was harmed?
For a public, official or commercial document, intent to injure is not needed. In Typoco v. People (2017), the Supreme Court said what is punished is the violation of public faith. For a private document, Article 172 requires damage to a third party or intent to cause it.
Can a public employee be charged under Article 172?
Yes, if he did not take advantage of his official position. In Garong v. People (2016), the Supreme Court listed the offender under Article 172 as a private individual, or a public officer or employee who did not take advantage of his official position.
What is the penalty if a public officer falsifies a document using his position?
That is Article 171: prision mayor and a fine not exceeding ₱1,000,000, as amended by Republic Act No. 10951.
General information, not legal advice. For your case, ask a lawyer, the Public Attorney's Office (PAO) or the agency.
Was this page helpful?