Short answer. It depends on the rank of the court whose order or officer was disobeyed. A charge involving a Regional Trial Court, or a court of equal or higher rank, is filed with that same court. A charge involving a lower court may be filed there, or with the Regional Trial Court of that locality.
What the law says
Where the charge for indirect contempt has been committed against a Regional Trial Court or a court of equivalent or higher rank, or against an officer appointed by it, the charge may be filed with such court.
Rule 71, Section 5 — Where charge to be filed. Read the full provision →
What the law says
Where such contempt has been committed against a lower court, the charge may be filed with the Regional Trial Court of the place in which the lower court is sitting
Rule 71, Section 5 — Where charge to be filed. Read the full provision →
Contempt against an RTC or higher
Section 5 keeps venue simple at the top: if the disobedience was against a Regional Trial Court, a court of equivalent or higher rank, or an officer that such a court appointed, the charge is filed with that very court. There is no real need to go anywhere else — the offended court simply hears its own contempt charge. This makes sense given the seniority involved: there is simply no higher-level trial court within the ordinary hierarchy to which such a matter could sensibly be referred instead. This also applies to an officer appointed by such a court, not just the court itself, so disobedience aimed at a court-appointed officer follows the same single-forum rule as disobedience aimed at the judge directly.
Contempt against a lower court
Where the contempt was committed against a lower court — a first-level trial court, for instance — the rule gives two options. The charge may be filed with the Regional Trial Court covering the place where that lower court sits, or the proceedings may instead be started directly in the lower court itself, subject to appeal to the corresponding Regional Trial Court. This flexibility recognizes that the lower court itself is often much better positioned to know the actual facts of the disobedience firsthand, having witnessed or been the direct target of the disobedience itself. Choosing the lower court preserves a right of appeal to the Regional Trial Court that filing directly with the Regional Trial Court would not carry, since the RTC would then already be acting as the court of first instance.
Why the choice matters
Picking the wrong forum wastes time and effort and can invite a motion to dismiss on jurisdictional grounds. Before filing an indirect contempt charge, identify precisely which court or officer was disobeyed and match it against Section 5's two tracks — direct filing with the offended court's own level, or the RTC-versus-lower-court option — so the charge properly lands where the rule actually says it belongs from the outset, rather than risking unnecessary delay from a formal challenge to venue later on in the proceedings.