Subject Criminal Law II Case Title

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

plaintiff-appellee,

vs.

ALIPIO SANTIANO, JOSE SANDIGAN,

ARMENIA PILLUETA and JOSE
VICENTE (JOVY) CHANCO,
accused-appellants.

Topic Arbitrary Detention Docket No. G.R. No. 123979 December 3, 1998

Digested by Siejame G. Aso Ponente VITUG, J.

Summary

A person was found dead at the canal in Pili, Caramines Sur. The dead body was identified by Robert Dy Kow as
his brother Ramon John Dy Kow Jr. When Dr. Thomas S. Gonzales performed an autopsy on the cadaver of the
victim, his findings revealed that the cause of death was internal hemorrhage secondary to gunshot wound.

Accuse-appellants Alipio Santiano, Jose Sandigan, Armenia Pillueta and Jose Vicente (Jovy) Chance were
indicted for the kidnapping with murder of Ramon John Dy Kow, Jr., a detention prisoner at the Naga City Jail.

When arraigned, the four accused pleaded not guilty to the charge. The trial thereupon ensued.

Doctrine

Art. 267. Kidnapping and serious illegal detention. — Any private individual who shall kidnap or detain another; or in
any other manner deprive him of his liberty, shall suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death;

1. If the kidnapping or detention shall have lasted more than five days.
2. If it shall have been committed simulating public authority.
3. If any serious physical injuries shall have been inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained; or if threats to
kill him shall have been made.
4. If the person kidnapped or detained shall be a minor, female, or a public officer.

The penalty shall be death where the kidnapping or detention was committed for the purpose of extorting ransom from
the victim or any other person, even if none of the circumstances above mentioned were present in the commission of
the offense.

( Ang Art. 267 jud ang naas ruling sa case but I included Art. 124 nalang kay mao ang mu fit sa discussion
hehe)

Art. 124. Arbitrary detention. – Any public officer or employee who, without legal grounds, detains a person, shall
suffer:

1. The penalty of arresto mayor, in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period, if the
detention has not exceeded three days;
2. The penalty prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods, if the detention has continued more than
three but not more than fifteen days;
3. The penalty of prision mayor, if the detention has continued for more than fifteen days but not more than six
months; and
4. That of reclusion temporal, if the detention shall have exceeded six months
Elements of Arbitrary Detention:

1. That the offender is a public officer or employee.

2. That he detains a person.
3. That the detention is without legal grounds.

The offender in arbitrary detention is a public officer or employee.

The public officers liable for arbitrary detention must be vested with authority to detain or order the detention of
persons accused of a crime, but when they detain a person they have no legal grounds therefor.

Such public officers are the policemen and other agents of the law, the judges or mayors. A barangay captain and a
municipal councilor are public officers.

If the detention is perpetrated by other public officers, the crime committed may be illegal detention, because they
are acting in their private capacity.

If the offender is a private individual, the act of detaining another is illegal detention under Article 267 or Article 268.

But private individuals who conspired with public officers in detaining certain policemen are guilty of arbitrary
detention.

Facts

Accused:

1. Alipio Santiano - active Civilian Volunteer/Assists of the NARCOM

2. Jose Sandigan- a regular member of the PNP but, he was a former organic member of the NARCOM
3. Armenia Pillueta- an organic member of the NARCOM, Naga City, Command
4. Jose Vicente (Jovy) Chanco- active Civilian Volunteer/Assists of the NARCOM

Victim: Ramon John Dy Kow, Jr. - detention prisoner at the Naga City Jail

● December 28, 1993- A dead body was found at the canal in Pili, Caramines Sur on which later on was
identified as Ramon John Dy Kow, Jr.
● According to William Rañola (prosecution’s witness), he saw the victim being accosted, held and dragged
to the Narcotics Command (NARCOM) office by appellants Santiano and Sandigan.
● Inside the NARCOM office, the victim was mauled by Santiano. For several minutes, the latter continued
to batter the former with punches while Pillueta stood by the door and acted as “lookout”
● The appellants took the victim away using a trimobile owned and driven by Chanco
● Witness Rañola was able to identify the fatigue jacket being worn by the victim on the evening of his
abduction and when his dead body was found in the morning
● Don Gumba corroborated Rañola's testimony. Gumba was positive that he had seen the victim at around
eight o'clock in the evening of 27 December 1993 with appellants Santiano and Pillueta on board the
trimobile driven by appellant Chanco on its way towards the direction of Palestina, Pili, Camarines Sur,
where, the following morning the victim was found dead evidently after succumbing to several gunshot
wounds.

Dr. Thomas S. Gonzales performed an autopsy on the cadaver of the victim. His findings revealed that Dy Kow, Jr., had
fatally sustained the following injuries:

➔ Eye: Contusion, upper lid extending to the outer canthus, right;

➔ Ear: lacerated wound ripping off the lowest pole of the lobule, right; serrated border
➔ Sub-occipital region: lacerated wound, 0.9 cms. in length, centrally located;
➔ Neck: punctured wound, 3-4 mm deep, semi-circular with serrated border, base of neck at the sternomastoid
border, right;
➔ Chest: Gunshot wound
➔ Point of entrance: 2nd ICS, sternal border, right, 12 mm in diameter
➔ Bullet route: from the point of entrance extending backwards to the left, piercing the heart and left lung and
lodging on the anterior aspect or surface of the sub scapular area, left
➔ Point of exist: None
 ➔ Bullet slug: Recovered
CAUSE OF DEATH: INTERNAL HEMORRHAGE ; SECONDARY TO GUNSHOT WOUND.
● Decision of the RTC: Accused are guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Kidnapping as
defined and penalized in Art. 267 of the RPC, there being no mitigating or aggravating circumstances,
hereby sentences each and all of them to suffer imprisonment, Reclusion Perpetua, with all accessories of
the penalty, and to indemnify the heirs of Ramon John Dy Kow, Jr. the sum of Fifty Thousand Pesos, and
to pay the costs.
● Accused-appellants filed the instant appeal.
Petitioner’s Side
● May 13, 1993- the victim and his live-in partner,
Loida Navidad were arrested by appellants
Sandigan and Pillueta and several other NARCOM
agents for alleged illegal possession of marijuana
and were brought to the NARCOM Office situated
at PNP Headquarters-Naga City
● Pillueta warned the victim and Navidad not to
contact a lawyer and reminded them that "it is only
a matter of P10,000.00"
● Navidad’s brother arrived accompanied by a
lawyer, hence, Pillueta got angry
● The victim and Navidad were dragged to the Naga
City Jail situated at a distance of six (6) to seven
(7) meters from the NARCOM Office and since
their arrest, they were detained at the Naga City
Jail
● Sometime in July 1993-appellant Santiano was
detained in the same cell occupied by the victim at
the Naga City Jail. Santiano was mauled by the
inmates of Cell 3 (the victim was one of those who
participated in mauling him)
● November 1993- after the release of Santiano, he
went back to the City Jail accompanied by Lt.
Dimaano and pointed the victim as the mastermind
of his mauling
● December 27, 1993- at about 6:00 o'clock in the
evening, the victim asked permission from a jail
trustee to allow him to buy viand outside the jail .
When he left, the victim was wearing a fatigue
jacket and short pants.
● As the victim emerged from the PNP store, he was
accosted by appellants Sandigan and Santiano.
● The two (2) appellants held the victim between
them and thereafter hurriedly, proceeded towards
the NARCOM Office situated at a distance of
about twenty-five (25) meters away
● Upon reaching the door of the NARCOM office, the
victim was pushed inside. Sandigan proceeded to
and took his place at Plaza Barlin facing the PNP
Police Station
● The victim was made to sit and thereafter
mauled by appellant Santiano where the latter
got hold of a handkerchief, rolled it around his
fists and continued to punch the victim for
almost fifteen (15) minutes
Defendants’ Side
● December 27, 1993- at about 5:00 0’ clock pm,
Sandigan was in front of the Advent theater
where he saw Santiano and he invited him for a
snack at the Mang Donald's, a burger house
● Sandigan and Santiano saw Chanco emerging
from the Nehrus Department Store where the
latter bought something and that the three of
them proceeded to the NARCOM office where
Pilluetta is situated
● Chanco's trimobile was parked in front of the
NARCOM office
● As it was intermittently raining, Sandigan,
Santiano and Chanco left the NARCOM office
past 6:00 P.M. aboard the trimobile of Chanco
● Pillueta together with SPO3 Lorna Fernandez
and Tet Deniega left the NARCOM office at or
about 8:00 P.M. and proceeded to the
Sampaguita Music Lounge to watch a lady band
perform
● After failing to decide whether to see a movie or a
round of drink, Sandigan and Chanco conducted
Santiano to the jeepney terminal for Milaor,
Camarines Sur. Afterwhich, Chanco also
conducted Sandigan to the Philtranco terminal
where the latter boarded a bus to Bato,
Camarines Sur where he resides.
● That between 6:30 and 7:00 o'clock P.M. of the
same date- Santiano was in Milaor, Camarines
Sur, a Municipality less than four kilometers away
from Naga City where he fetched Ms. Arcadia
Paz, a traditional mid-wife (komadrana), from the
latter's residence to conduct/perform a pre-natal
therapy (hilot) upon his (Santiano) pregnant wife
of which therapy was finished at about 9:00PM
and Ms. Paz left at 10:00PM
● December 28, 1993- Pillueta and her
companions left the Sampaguita Music Lounge at
or about 2:00 A.M
● That on December 27, 1993- at any time of the
day, the late Ramon John Dy Kow, Jr. was neither
seen by the accused-appellants nor was he in the
NARCOM office more specifically and particularly
between 6:00 to 7:00 P.M.
● On December 28, 1993- a cadaver of an
unknown person was discovered somewhere in
● As the victim was being mauled, appellant Pillueta the vicinity of Barangay Palestina, Municipality of
stood by the door of the NARCOM office, her both Pili, Province of Camarines, by Danilo Camba,
hands inside her pockets while looking to her right the Barangay Captain of said locality. The corpse
and left, acting as a lookout was later on identified by Robert Dy Kow as that
● After a few minutes, appellant Chanco went out of one of his brother, Ramon John Dy Kow, Jr.
the NARCOM Office and started the trimobile.
● Inside the trimobile, appellant Pillueta
occupied the back seat. Santiano occupied the
reserved seat in front of the passenger seat
which was occupied by the victim.
● Sandigan, who was at Plaza Barlin, transferred to
and stationed himself at the Century Fox in front of
the GSIS building situated at the corner of General
Luna and Arana Streets
● The trimobile proceeded on its way towards the
direction of Palestina, Pili, Camarines Sur, the
victim was still aboard the trimobile seated at the
passenger seat nearest the driver

Issue/s Ruling

Whether or not the accused are guilty of the crime of NO.

Arbitrary Detention.
● The elements of the offense, here adequately shown,
are:
A. that the offender is a private individual;
B. that he kidnaps or detains another, or in any other
manner deprives the latter of his liberty;
C. that the act of detention or kidnapping is illegal;
and
D. that, in the commission of the offense, any of the
following circumstances is present, i.e., (i) that the
kidnapping or detention lasts for more than 5
days, or (ii) that it is committed simulating public
authority, or (iii) that any serious physical injuries
are inflicted upon the person kidnapped or
detained or threats to kill him are made, or (iv) that
the person kidnapped or detained is a minor,
female, or a public officer.

● The Court likewise shares the view of the Solicitor

General in pointing out that —

1. There is no question that the victim, who was on the

date in question detained at the Naga City Jail, asked
permission from the jail trustee in order to buy viand
outside. It was while he was emerging from the PNP store
that he was accosted by appellants Santiano and
Sandigan.

2. From the moment that the victim was accosted in Naga

City, he was at first dragged to the NARCOM Office where
he was mauled. This circumstance indicated the intention
to deprive him of his liberty for sometime, an essential
element of the crime of kidnapping.

3. The victim did not only sustain serious physical injuries

 but likewise died as indicated in the autopsy report, thus,
belying appellants' claim that none of the circumstances in
Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code was present.

4. Witness Don Gumba was positive when he declared

that he saw the victim at about 8:00 o'clock in the evening
of December 27, 1993 with appellant Chanco on its way
towards the direction of Palestina, Pili, Camarines Sur
where the victim was found dead.

● The fact alone that appellant Pillueta is "an

organic member of the NARCOM" and appellant
Sandigan a regular member of the PNP would not
exempt them from the criminal liability for
kidnapping.
● It is quite clear that in abducting and taking away the
victim, appellants did so neither in furtherance of
official function nor in the pursuit of authority vested in
them. It is not, in fine, in relation to their office, but in
purely private capacity that they have acted in concert
with their co-appellants Santiano and Chanco.

Hence, the accused are guilty of violating Art. 267 of

the Revised Penal Code.

Supreme Courts’ Final Ruling

The crime of kidnapping cannot be here absorbed by the charge of murder since the detention of the victim is not shown
to have been for the purpose of liquidating him. Appellants themselves, in fact, all deny having killed the victim. And while
the evidence may have thus been found to be wanting by the trial court so as to equally hold appellants responsible for
the death of the victim, the Court is convinced that the court a quo did not err in making them account for kidnapping. The
circumstances heretofore recited indicate the attendance of conspiracy among the appellants thereby making them each
liable for the offense.

The claim of appellants that they cannot be held liable for indemnity in the amount of P50,000.00 because the
prosecution did not present evidence to prove damages is without merit. The indemnity awarded by the trial
court clearly refers to the civil indemnity for the offense and not for actual damages sustained.

SO ORDERED.