3. Bumatay V.

Bumatay her marriage with him was valid and subsisting, Lolita contracted another marriage
GR NO. 191320 with Jose M. Bumatay.
April 25, 2017 4. When Lolita contracted her second marriage with Jose Bumatay, she knows fully
BL well that her first marriage with her first husband Mr. Amado Rosete, who is still
Topic: Real Party in interest in criminal Cases living up to today, has not been legally dissolved but existing.
Petitioners: Jona Bumatay 5. In her Counter-Affidavit, Lolita claims that she learned from her children (with
Respondents: Lolita Bumatay Amado) that Amado had filed a petition for declaration of nullity of their marriage.
Ponente: Caguioa, J. 6. Sometime in 1990, she was informed by her children that Amado had died in Nueva
Vizcaya.
Rules of Court: Rule110 Section 5
7. Subsequently, an Information for Bigamy was filed by Prosecutor Valdez of the
Section 5. Who must prosecute criminal actions. — All criminal actions commenced by a
Office of the Provincial Prosecutor of Pangasinan
complaint or information shall be prosecuted under the direction and control of the
The Proceedings before the RTC- Dagupan City on Lolita's Petition for Declaration of
prosecutor. However, in Municipal Trial Courts or Municipal Circuit Trial Courts when the
Nullity
prosecutor assigned thereto or to the case is not available, the offended party, any peace
8. January 2005 — after the Information for Bigamy against Lolita was filed in the RTC-
officer, or public officer charged with the enforcement of the law violated may prosecute the
San Carlos but before her arraignment, Lolita filed with the RTC of Dagupan City a
case. This authority cease upon actual intervention of the prosecutor or upon elevation of the
(This Section was repealed by A.M. No. 02-2-07-SC effective May 1, 2002) petition for the declaration of nullity of her marriage to Amado.
case to the Regional Trial Court.
9. September 20, 2005, the RTC-Dagupan City issued a Decision declaring as null and
The crimes of adultery and concubinage shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint
void the marriage between Lolita and Amado.
filed by the offended spouse. The offended party cannot institute criminal prosecution
10. the RTC-Dagupan City found that no marriage ceremony took place between Lolita
without including the guilty parties, if both alive, nor, in any case, if the offended party has
and Amado as it was Lolita's sister who had married Amado and that, in fact, the
consented to the offense or pardoned the offenders.
signature appearing on the marriage certificate was not Lolita's signature but that
The offenses of seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness shall not be prosecuted except
of her sister's.
upon a complaint filed by the offended party or her parents, grandparents or guardian, nor,
11. their marriage was void from the very beginning.
in any case, if the offender has been expressly pardoned by any of them. If the offended party
The Bigamy Proceedings before the RTC-San Carlos
dies or becomes incapacitated before she can file the complaint, and she has no known
12. November 2, 2005, she filed a Motion to Quash the Information.
parents, grandparents or guardian, the State shall initiate the criminal action in her behalf.
13. Her motion was hinged on the argument that the first element of the crime of
The offended party, even if a minor, has the right to initiate the prosecution of the offenses
bigamy — that is, that the offender has been previously legally married — is not
of seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness independently of her parents,
present.
grandparents, or guardian, unless she is incompetent or incapable of doing so. Where the
14. Lolita attached a copy of the RTC-Dagupan City Decision declaring the marriage
offended party, who is a minor, fails to file the complaint, her parents, grandparents, or
between her and Amado void ab initio.
guardian may file the same. The right to file the action granted to parents, grandparents or
15. RTC-San Carlos granted Lolita’s Motion to Quash and dismissed the complaint for
guardian shall be exclusive of all other persons and shall be exercised successively in the order
bigamy.
herein provided, except as stated in the preceding paragraph.
16. CA affirmed the RTC-San Carlos' Order granting the Motion to Quash and
No criminal action for defamation which consists in the imputation of the offenses mentioned
dismissed Jona's appeal.
above shall be brought except at the instance of and upon complaint filed by the offended
party.
HELD/RATIO
The prosecution for violation of special laws shall be governed by the provisions thereof.

ISSUE: Whether or Not Jona Bumatay has the legal capacity to sue Lolita in a Criminal Case 17. it appears undisputed that Jona has no legal personality to assail the dismissal of
of Bigamy? NO. the criminal case.
18. Rule 110, Section 5 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, dictates that all
FACTS criminal actions commenced by complaint or by information shall be prosecuted
1. Lolita allegedly married a certain Amado Rosete (Amado) on January 30, under the direction and control of a public prosecutor. In appeals of criminal cases
1968, when she was 16 years old. before the Supreme Court, the authority to represent the State is vested solely in
2. Prior to the declaration of nullity of her marriage with Amado on the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG)
September 20, 2005, Lolita married Jona's foster father, Jose Bumatay 19. in criminal cases, the People is the real party-in-interest and only the OSG can
(Jose), on November 6, 2003. represent the People in criminal proceedings before this Court. Inasmuch as the
3. Jona filed a Complaint-affidavit for Bigamy against Lolita, stating that on private offended party is but a witness in the prosecution of offenses, the interest
November 6, 2003, while Lolita’s husband Amado Rosete was still alive and of the private offended party is limited only to the aspect of civil liability.
20. It follows therefore that in criminal cases, the dismissal of the case against
an accused can only be appealed by the Solicitor General, acting on behalf
of the State.
21. Jona's personality to even institute the bigamy case and thereafter to
appeal the RTC-San Carlos' Order dismissing the same is nebulous, at best.
22. Settled is the rule that "every action must be prosecuted or defended in
the name of the real party in interest[,]" who, in turn, is one "who stands
to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit, or by the party
entitled to the avails of the suit."
23. Within this context, "interest" means material interest or an interest in
issue to be affected by the decree or judgment of the case, as distinguished
from mere interest in the question involved.
24. To be clear, real interest refers to a present substantial interest, and not a
mere expectancy, or a future, contingent, subordinate or consequential
interest.
25. Jona's natural parents are unknown and she was merely raised as the
"foster daughter" of Jose Bumatay, without having undergone the process
of legal adoption.
26. Jona merely denotes herself as "the only child of the late Jose Bumatay,"
without, however, presenting or even indicating any document or proof to
support her claim of personality or legal standing. HEITAD
27. WHEREFORE, premises considered, this Court resolves to DENY the instant
petition for lack of merit and AFFIRM the Court of Appeals' Decision dated
August 28, 2009 and Resolution dated February 4, 2010.