People v. Pletcha, Jr.

No. 19029-CR, 27 June 1977
Presbitero, J.

FAC!"

In the morning of June 10, 1973, eight men (all workers of Radeco
Corporation were constructing a fence made of !am!oo poles and wires on
a piece of land in "acienda #aspit allegedl$ leased !$ the Radeco
Corporation from a certain %opinco&

Claiming actual possession and ownership, appellant 'ito letcha, Jr&, asked
the group to desist from fencing pending resur)e$ of the land he proposed,
!ut he was totall$ ignored& 'he appellant came !ack with a !olo, without an$
chance, howe)er, to actuall$ use it or threaten them, !ecause as soon as the
group saw him the$ ran awa$&

 'he eight men *led the complaint for gra)e coercion under +rticle -. of the
Re)ised enal Code&

 'ito letcha, Jr&, in)oking /selfhelp under +rticle 29 of the Ci)il Code
(gi)ing him as the owner the right to use reasona!le force to eclude an$
person threatening his peaceful ownership in defense of the land he owns
for 19 $ears, fought o4 and pre)ented the corporation5s crew of eight men
who without an$ court order was insisting to fence four hectares of his land,
as a result of which resistance he was prosecuted and con)icted of gra)e
coercion !$ the 6unicipal Court of 6urcia egros 8ccidental&

 'he eople asks for armance on the ground that the appellant should not
ha)e done an$thing !$ himself to resist !ut should ha)e gone to court
instead to en:oin the group of eight men from distur!ing his ownership&

#!!$%"

;hether or not the court erred in concluding that the acts of the accussed in
defense of his propert$ constituted gra)e coercion&

R$&#N'"

 (es. It is a wellsettled rule that /ours is a go)ernment of laws and not of

men and no person ma$ take the law into his hands& <ut this principle is not
a!solute&

=nder +rticle 29 of the Ci)il Code>

 

he o)ner or la)*ul possessor o* a thin+ has the ri+ht to

eclue an person *ro/ the eno/ent an isposal
thereo*. For this purpose, he /a use such *orce as /a
be reasonabl necessar to repel or prevent an actual or
threatene unla)*ul phsical invasion or usurpation o* 
his propert.

 'he +!o)e?uoted law con*rms the right of the appellant, an owner and
lawful possessor, to use reasona!le force to repel an in)asion or usurpation,
actual, threatened or ph$sical, of his propert$& 'he principle of selfdefense
and the protecti)e measures related thereto, co)ers not onl$ his life, !ut also
his li!ert$ and propert$&

he principle o* sel*-help authories the la)*ul possessor

to use *orce, not onl to prevent a threatene unla)*ul
invasion or usurpation thereo* it is a sort o* sel*-e*ense.
#t is la)*ul to repel *orce b *orce. 3e )ho /erel uses
*orce to e*en his possession oes not possess b *orce.
he use o* such necessar *orce to protect propriet or
possessor ri+ht constitutes usti*in+ circu/stances
uner our Penal Coe. 4olentino, A., Civil Coe o* the
Philippines, 5ol. ##, %. 1972, pp. 6-698

+c?uitted&