AAA petitioner, v. BBB respondent.

GR No. 212448

Facts:

-VAWC committed through marital infidelity; petition for the issuance of a writ of certiorari to
nullify Reso of RTC Br.158 or Crim case No. 146468.

-AAA and BBB were married on August 1, 2006 in Quezon City. They have 2 children.

-BBB is a chef in Singapore. Little to no financial support to AAA and children. Live in with Lisel
Mok in Singapore.

-Prosecutor found sufficient basis to charge BBB with causing AAA mental and emotional
anguish through his alleged marital infidelity.

-Motion to quash by BBB because lack of jurisdiction by the Court.

-Court was not convinced. RA 9262 cannot only be imposed within the country. It is as if the
husbands of Filipino women have been given license to enter extra-marital affairs without fear
of any consequences, as long as they carried out abroad.

ISSUE:

Whether or not RTC has jurisdiction in view of the peculiar provisions of RA 9262

RULING:

In criminal cases, venue is jurisdictional. The place where the crime was committed determines
not only the venue of the action but is an essential element of jurisdiction. However, if the
evidence adduced during the trial shows that the offense was committed somewhere else, the
court should dismiss the action for want of jurisdiction. Even if alleged extra marital affair
causing the offended wife mental and emotional anguish is committed abroad, the same does
not place a prosecution under RA 9262 absolutely beyond the reach of Ph courts. The petition is
granted, Resolutions are set aside, criminal case is ordered reinstated.

A person charged with a continuing or transitory crime may be validly tried in any
municipality where the offense was in part committed.