arrest, or is detained or restrained by theofficers of the law, he can claim theguarantee of his provisional liberty underthe Bill of Rights, and he retains his rightto bail unless he is charged with a capitaloffense, or with an offense punishablewithreclusionperpetuaorlifeimprisonment, and the evidence of hisguilt is strong. Once it has beenestablished that the evidence of guilt isstrong, no right to bail shall berecognized.9. FELICIANO vs PASICOLANFacts:Feliciano, upon learning that anamended information charging him and17 others of kidnapping with murder hadbeen filed, and that a warrant for his
arrest had been issued, went into hiding.Without surrendering himself, he filed amotion through his lawyer in which heasks that the court fix at 10k the amountof the bail bond for his release pendingtrial. The Provincial Fiscal opposed thismotion, on the ground that the filing waspremature as Feliciano had not yet beenarrested. CFI Judge Pasicolan dismissedFeliciano’s motion on the ground that"pending his arrest or surrender, PabloFeliciano has not the right to ask thiscourt to admit him to bail." Felicianocontends that the Constitution providesthat “All persons shall before convictionbe bailable by sufficient sureties, exceptthose charged with capital offenses whenevidence of guilt is strong.” It is furtheraverred that the phrase "all persons” hasbeen interpreted to mean "all persons,without distinction, whether formallycharged or not yet so charged with anycriminal offense." Therefore, mandamuslies to compel Judge Pasicolan to do so.ISSUE: Whether or not petitioner isentitled to bail?RULING:NO. The person applying foradmission to bail should be in the custodyof the law, or otherwise deprived of hisliberty. Bail is defined under the Rules ofCourt as security “required and given forthe release of a person who is in custodyof the law” In the case of HerraTeehankee vs Rovira, this Court held that“According to this provision, the generalrule is that any person, before beingconvicted of any criminal offense, shall bebailable, except when he is charged witha capital offense and the evidence of hisguilt is strong. Of course, only thosepersons who have been either arrested,detained or otherwise deprived of theirliberty will ever have occasion to seek thebenefits of said provision.” And in thecase of Manighas vs Luna, this Court heldthat “the right to bail only accrues when aperson is arrested or deprived of hisliberty. The purpose of bail is to secureone’s release and it would be incongruousto grant bail to one who is free. Thus, ‘bailis the security required and given for therelease of a person who is in the custodyof the law.’” Without surrendering himself,he filed the motion in which he asks thatthe court fix the amount of the bail bondfor his release pending trial. It is,therefore, clear that the petitioner is afree man and is, under the jurisprudence,not entitled to admission to bail.