Short answer. Yes. Introducing a falsified document into a judicial proceeding, or using one to cause damage while knowing it is false, is punished by the penalty next lower in degree than the penalty for the falsification itself — one degree lighter than what the forger who made the document faces.
What the law says
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.
Revised Penal Code, Article 172 — Falsification By A Private Individual. Read the full provision →
Using is a separate, lighter offense from forging
The law treats the person who actually falsifies a document — a private individual who commits falsification of a public, official, or commercial document, or of a private document to someone's damage — as the primary offender, punished under the standard penalty for that act. Someone who merely uses the false document afterward, whether by introducing it in evidence in a court case or using it to cause damage to another with knowledge that it is false, is punished one degree lighter: the penalty next lower in degree than what applies to the falsification itself.
What has to be proven for the use to count
The lighter penalty only attaches if the user knowingly introduced the false document in evidence, or used it with intent to cause damage, or actually caused damage by using it. Innocently relying on a document you did not know was falsified is a different matter entirely — the law is punishing knowing use, not ignorance. So if you submitted a document in a court case believing it was genuine, that is not the conduct this provision addresses; the knowledge element is what makes the act punishable at all.
A current-law note on penalty amounts
The fine attached to this offense, and to falsification generally, was revised by Republic Act No. 10951 (2017), which updated the property values and fines used throughout the Revised Penal Code. Older printings of the Code — including many that still circulate online — show the original 1930s peso amounts, which are far lower than what applies today. Anyone relying on a copy of the Code for the current fine or penalty structure should confirm it reflects the RA 10951 amounts rather than the outdated figures.
Why the gap in penalties exists
The structure reflects a judgment about relative culpability: the person who fabricates a document has done something more serious than the person who merely puts an already-fabricated document to use, even though both acts can cause real harm. This does not mean using a forged document in court is a minor matter — knowingly submitting false evidence to a court remains a criminal act with real consequences, including possible liability for other offenses connected to the same conduct, such as perjury or obstruction, depending on the specific facts.