Mutilation of coins; Importation and utterance of mutilated coins, Revised Penal Code

1. Concept

Art. 164. Mutilation of coins; Importation and utterance of mutilated coins – The penalty of prisión correccional in its minimum period and a fine not to exceed Four hundred thousand pesos (₱400,000) shall be imposed upon any person who shall mutilate coins of the legal currency of the Philippines or import or utter mutilated current coins, or in connivance with mutilators or importers. (Act No. 3815, Revised Penal Code)

2. Mode of commission

Elements of the offense:

1) The offender commits any of the following:

a) Mutilates coins of the legal currency [of the United States or] of the Philippine Islands or import;

b) Utter mutilated current coins; or,


Title 4 – Crimes Against Public Interest, Book 2, Revised Penal Code

Content Details

Disclaimer: All information is for educational and general information only. These should not be taken as professional legal advice or opinion. Please consult a competent lawyer to address your specific concerns. Any statements or opinions of the author are solely his own and do not reflect that of any organization he may be connected. Please refer to our full Disclaimer.

For updates: If the legal provisions being discussed have been amended or repealed by legislation or has been the subject of a Supreme Court decision which may have impacted how it is interpreted, do let us know so we can consider for the next update. Reach out via our Contact Us

Related Content

Continuing crimes

There are crimes which are called transitory or continuing offenses because some acts material and essential to the crime occur in one province and some in another, in which case, the rule is settled that the court of either province where any of the essential ingredients of the crime took place has — jurisdiction to try the case.

Videos & Podcasts

Legal Maxims

in dubio pro reo

Latin maxim. • “when in doubt, for the accused” (People v. Salcena, G.R. No. 192261, November 16, 2011)

lex prospicit, non respicit

• “the law looks forward not backward” (Co v. CA, En Banc, G.R. No. 100776, October 28, 1993, citing Development Bank of the Philippines v.

legis non est recedendum

Latin maxim. • “from the words of a statute there should be no departure” (Bolos v. Bolos, G.R. No. 186400, October 20, 2010)

salus populi est suprema lex

Latin maxim. • “the welfare of the people is the supreme law” (Southern Luzon Drug Corporation v. DSWD, En Banc, G.R. No. 199669, April 25,

See more

Law Content