Possession of picklocks or similar tools, A304 Revised Penal Code
Possession of picklocks or similar tools – is an offense involving the custody or having picklocks or similar tools, and without lawful justification.
1. Concept
Possession of picklocks or similar tools – is an offense involving the custody or having picklocks or similar tools, and without lawful justification.
A picklock — a tool used in picking locks — is in itself specially adapted to the commission of robbery of the kind provided for in Articles 299 (a) 3 and 302, par. 3 of the Revised Penal Code (People v. Lopez, En Banc, G.R. No. L-18766, May 20, 1965, Per Bengzon, J.P., J.)
a. Legal basis
Article 304. Possession of picklocks or similar tools. – Any person who shall without lawful cause have in his possession picklocks or similar tools especially adopted to the commission of the crime of robbery, shall be punished by arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon any person who shall make such tools. If the offender be a locksmith, he shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods.
(Revised Penal Code)
2. Modes of commission
The following are the modes of committing the offense:
1) To be in possession of picklocks or similar tools
a. Mode 1: Possession of picklocks or similar tools
Elements of the offense:
1) Possession of picklocks or similar tools specially adapted to the commission of the crime of robbery; and
2) Such possession is without lawful cause. (People v. Lopez, En Banc, G.R. No. L-18766, May 20, 1965)
1) Element 1: Possession of picklocks or similar tools
The possession of picklocks or similar tools is the gravamen of the offense. There is no lawful justification for a person to be in possession of picklocks or similar tools as they are especially designed or intended for robbery.
a) Picklock per se, special tool for robbery
Since picking of locks is one way to gain entrance to commit robbery, a picklock is per se specially adapted to the commission of robbery. ((People v. Lopez, supra.)
a) Intention to possess, immaterial
Unauthorized possession of picklocks or similar tools, regardless of the possessor’s intent, is punishable as such illegal possession. (People v. Quijada, En Banc, G.R. Nos. 115008-09, July 24, 1996, Per Davide, Jr., J.)
2) Element 2: Without lawful cause
The possession of picklocks or similar tools has to be without lawful cause. This is because it is possible for a person to have lawful grounds for being in possession of these tools. For instance, locksmiths by virtue of their trade in offering services such as opening doors/houses where the owner/tenant was locked out would be expected to be in possession of picklocks.
NB: Considering that possession of picklocks or similar tools is considered an offense, it may be argued that the presumption is against anyone who is in possession of such tools. Otherwise stated, the burden of proof is on those who are caught having picklocks or similar tools to show that they have lawful reasons for having them.
3. Things to note
The following are some additional things to note about this offense.
a. Manufacturing, not covered
The offense is specifically on possession of picklocks or similar tools. That being the case, the manufacturing or creation thereof is not covered. To be clear, the manufacturing or creation of picklocks or similar tools is not covered by the offense.
However, once the picklocks or similar tools have been manufactured or created, the one who has them has possession thereof. Therefore, the manufacturers may be liable for possession of picklocks or similar tools if they are not able to show that they have lawful cause for having them.
3A. Procedural
The following are some procedural matters.
a. Procedural 1
People v. Lopez, En Banc, G.R. No. L-18766, May 20, 1965, Per Bengzon, J.P., J.:
• After the prosecution presented one witness, said accused moved to dismiss the case on the ground that the facts charged in the information do not constitute an offense. It was argued that an essential element of illegal possession of false keys was not alleged, namely, that the picklock or false keys in the possession of the accused were “specially adapted to the commission of the crime of robbery.”
• The information alleged that the accused possessed, “without lawful cause … seven (7) false keys, one of which is a picklock or master key.”
• A picklock — a tool used in picking locks — is in itself specially adapted to the commission of robbery of the kind provided for in Articles 299 (a) 3 and 302, par. 3 of the Revised Penal Code.
• Since picking of locks is one way to gain entrance to commit robbery, a picklock is per se specially adapted to the commission of robbery. The description in the information of a picklock as “specially adapted to the commission of robbery” is therefore unnecessary for its sufficiency. Notwithstanding the omission of such superfluous description, therefore, the charge of the offense of illegal possession of a picklock is valid. We find both elements of the crime clearly alleged in the information in question.
• Furthermore, the information alleged illegal possession of “seven (7) false keys.” The Revised Penal Code, in Article 305, defines “false keys” to include “the tools mentioned in the next preceding article.” Article 304 — “the next preceding article” — mentions “picklocks or similar, tools specially adapted to the commission of the crime of robbery.” It follows that the term “false keys” appearing in the information sufficiently describes such tools.
References
⦁ Title 10 – Crimes Against Property, Book 2, Revised Penal Code
/Updated: June 15, 2023
