#20 PEOPLE v.
PUNO claimed that she fell down when she stubbed her toe while running
G.R. No 97471 | 17 February 1993
By: MARGALLO
Topic: Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery
Petitioner: People of the Philippines
Respondent: Isabelo Puno y Guevarra, alias "Beloy," and Enrique
Amurao y Puno, alias "Enry,"
Ponente: REGALADO, J.
FACTS:
January 13, 1988 in QC, at around 5:00 pm: the accused Isabelo Puno,
who is the personal driver of Mrs. Sarmiento's husband (who was then
away in Davao purportedly on account of local election there) arrived at
Mrs. Sarmiento's bakeshop in Araneta Ave, QC He told Mrs. Sarmiento
that her own driver Fred had to go to Pampanga on an emergency so
Isabelo will temporarily take his place. When it was time for Mrs.
Sarmiento to go home to Valle Verde in Pasig, she got into her husband's
Mercedes Benz with Isabelo driving. After the car turned right on a
corner of Araneta Ave, it stopped and a young man, accused Enrique
Amurao, boarded the car beside the driver. Enrique pointed a gun at Mrs.
Sarmiento as Isabelo told her that he needs to "get money" from her.
Mrs. Sarmiento had P7,000 on her bag which she handed to the accused.
But the accused said that they wanted P100,000 more.
The car sped off north towards the North superhighway where Isabelo
asked Mrs. Sarmiento to issue a check for P100,000. Mrs. Sarmiento
drafted 3 checks: two P30,000 checks and one P40,000 check.Isabelo
then turned the car around towards Metro Manila; later, he changed his
mind and turned the car again towards Pampanga. According to her,
Mrs. Sarmiento jumped out of the car then, crossed to the other side of
the superhighway and was able to flag down a fish vendor's van, her
dress had blood because according to her, she fell down on the ground
and was injured when she jumped out of the car. The defense does not
dispute the above narrative of the complainant except that according to
Isabelo, he stopped the car at North Diversion and freely allowed Mrs.
Sarmiento to step out of the car. He said he even slowed the car down as
he drove away, until he saw that his employer had gotten a ride. He
across the highway.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the said robbery can be classified as "highway robbery"
under PD No. 532 (Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery Law of 1974)
RULING:
NO.
Jurisprudence reveals that during the early part of the American
occupation of our country, roving bands were organized for robbery and
pillage and since the then existing law against robbery was inadequate
to cope with such moving bands of outlaws, the Brigandage Law was
passed (this is the origin of the law on highway robbery)
PD No. 532 punishes as highway robbery only acts of robbery
perpetrated by outlaws indiscriminately against any person or persons
on Philippine highways and not acts of robbery committed against only a
predetermined or particular victim
The mere fact that the robbery was committed inside a car which
was casually operating on a highway does not make PD No 532
applicable to the case
This is not justified by the accused's intention
Accused-appellants convicted of robbery (indeterminate sentence of 4
years and 2 months or prision correccional, as minimum, to 10 years of
prision mayor. Accused to pay Mrs. Sarmiento P7,000 as actual damages
and P20,000 as moral damages.)
DOCTRINE/S:
The mere fact that the robbery was committed inside a car which was
casually operating on a highway does not make PD No 532 applicable to
the case. This is not justified by the accused's intention.