Question

1. In a criminal case for theft, a complainant filed a complaint against the accused alleging that the latter stole her valuable jewelry. The investigating officer conducted a preliminary investigation and determined that there is probable cause to file an information for theft against the accused. However, the investigating officer is not one of the authorized officers to conduct a preliminary investigation under Rule 112. The accused, through counsel, filed a motion to quash the information on the ground that the investigating officer who conducted the preliminary investigation is not authorized by law. Decide with reasons.

2. As a barangay chairman, you received a complaint from one of the residents in your barangay against a certain person for physical injuries. The victim presented medical certificates and affidavits from witnesses to support his claim. Based on the evidence presented, you have reasonable belief that a crime has been committed and there is probable cause to warrant the filing of charges. Can you conduct a preliminary investigation as the barangay chairman? Discuss.

3. A police officer, after conducting surveillance and gathering evidence on an alleged drug pusher, filed a complaint-affidavit before the prosecutor's office. In the complaint-affidavit, the police officer stated that there is clear and convincing evidence to charge the accused with drug trafficking. The prosecutor reviewed the complaint-affidavit and dismissed the case for lack of probable cause. The police officer argues that the prosecutor violated his right to preliminary investigation by dismissing the case without conducting a proper preliminary investigation. Is the contention of the police officer correct? Explain.