CRIMINAL LAW BOOK 2

AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY

Article 114. Treason. – Any Filipino citizen
who levies war against the Philippines or adheres
to her enemies, giving them aid or comfort within
the Philippines or elsewhere. shall be punished by
reclusion perpetua to death and shall pay a fine
not to exceed 100,000 pesos.
No person shall be convicted of treason unless
on the testimony of two witnesses at least to the
same overt act or on confession of the accused in
open court.
Likewise, an alien, residing in the Philippines,
who commits acts of treason as defined in
paragraph 1 of this Article shall be punished by
reclusion temporal to death and shall pay a fine not
to exceed 100,000 pesos. (As amended by Sec. 2,
R.A. No. 7659, which took effect on 31 December
1993.)

Elements of treason:
1. That the offender is a Filipino citizen or an
alien residing
in the Philippines;
2. That there is a war in which the Philippines is
involved;
3. That the offender either -
a. levies war against the Government, or
b. adheres to the enemies, giving them aid or
comfort.

1
 Treason is a breach of allegiance to a
government, committed by a person who owes
allegiance to it. (63 C.J. 814)
Nature of the crime.
Treason, in its general sense, is the violation by
a subject of his allegiance to his sovereign or to the
supreme authority of the State. (U.S. v. Abad, 1 Phil.
437)
Allegiance
The first element of treason is that the offender
owes allegiance to the Government of the
Philippines.
By the term “allegiance” is meant the obligation
of fidelity and obedience which the individuals owe
to the government under which they live or to their
sovereign, in return for the protection they receive.
(52 Am. Jur. 797)
Note:
1.Allegiance is either permanent or temporary.
2.Treason cannot be committed in time of
peace.

Two ways or modes of committing treason:

1. By levying war against the Government.
2. By adhering to the enemies of the Philippines,
giving them aid or
comfort.
Meaning of "levies war."
Levying war requires the concurrence of two
things: (1) that there be an actual assembling of men;
and (2) for the purpose of executing a treasonable
design by force. (Ex parte Bollman and Ex parte
Swartwout, 1 U.S. Sup. Ct. Rep. [4 Cranch 75], p.
571)
2
 Art. 115. Conspiracy and proposal to commit
treason – Penalty. – The conspiracy and proposal
to commit the crime of treason shall be punished
respectively, by prision mayor and a fine not
exceeding 10,000 pesos, and by prision
correccional and a fine not exceeding 5,000 pesos.

How are the crimes of conspiracy and proposal to

commit treason committed?
Conspiracy to commit treason is committed
when in time of war, two or more persons come to
an agreement to levy war against the Government or
to adhere to the enemies and to give them aid or
comfort, and decide to commit it. (Arts. 8 and 114)
Proposal to commit treason is committed when in
time of war a person who has decided to levy war
against the Government or to adhere to the enemies
and to give them aid or comfort, proposes its
execution tosome other person or persons. (Arts. 8
and 114)
Conspiracy or proposal as a felony.
Although the general rule is that conspiracy and
proposal to commit a felony is not punishable (Art.
8), under Article 115 the mere conspiracy to commit
treason is a felony. The mere proposal to commit
treason is also a felony. Both are punishable under
Article 115.
The reason is that in treason the very existence
of the state is endangered.

Art. 116. Misprision of treason. - Every person

owing allegiance to (the United States or) the
Government of the Philippine Islands, without
being a foreigner, and having knowledge of any
3
conspiracy against them, who conceals or does
not disclose and make known the same, as soon as
possible, to the governor or fiscal of the province,
or the mayor or fiscal of the city in which he
resides, as the case may be, shall be punished as
an accessory to the crime of treason.

Elements:
1. That the offender must be owing allegiance to
the Government, and not a foreigner.
2. That he has knowledge of any conspiracy (to
commit treason) against the Government.
3. That he conceals or does not disclose and
make known the same as soon as possible to
the governor or fiscal of the province or the
mayor or fiscal of the city in which he resides.

Misprision of treason cannot be committed by a

resident alien.
The offender must be owing allegiance to the
Government, without being a foreigner.
The conspiracy is one to commit treason.
The phrase "having knowledge of any
conspiracy against them" has reference to conspiracy
to commit treason defined in Article 115.

Art. 117. Espionage. - The penalty of prision

correccional shall be inflicted upon any person
who:
1. Without authority therefor, enters a
warship, fort, or naval or military
establishment or reservation to obtain any
information, plans, photographs, or other

4
 data of a confidential nature relative to the
defense of the Philippine Archipelago; or
2. Being in possession, by reason of the
public office he holds, of the articles, data, or
information referred to in the preceding
paragraph, discloses their contents to a
representative of a foreign nation.
Espionage is the offense of gathering, transmitting,
or losing information respecting the national defense
with intent or reason to believe that the information
is to be used to the injury of the Republic of the
Philippines or to the advantage of any foreign
nation. (See the opening sentence of Sec. 1 and other
sections of Commonwealth Act No. 616)
Two ways of committing espionage under Article
117.
1.By entering, without authority therefor, a
warship, fort, or naval or military establishment
or reservation to obtain any information, plans,
photographs or other data of a confidential
nature relative to the defense of the Philippines.
Elements:
(a) That the offender enters any of the places
mentioned therein;
(b) That he has no authority therefor;
(c) That his purpose is to obtain information,
plans, photographs or other data of a
confidential nature relative to the defense of the
Philippines. (Guevara)

2.By disclosing to the representative of a foreign

nation the contents of the articles, data or
information referred to in paragraph No. 1 of
5
 Article 117, which he had in his possession by
reason of the public office he holds.
Elements:
(a) That the offender is a public officer;
(b) That he has in his possession the articles,
data or information referred to in paragraph
No. 1 of Article 117, by reason of the public
office he holds;
(c) That he discloses their contents to a
representative of a foreign nation.

Art. 118. Inciting to war or giving motives for

reprisals. – The penalty of reclusion temporal
shall be imposed upon any public officer or
employee, and that of prision mayor upon any
private individual, who, by unlawful or
unauthorized acts, provokes or gives occasion for
a war involving or liable to involve the Philippine
Islands or exposes Filipino citizens to reprisals on
their persons or property.

Elements:
1. That the offender performs unlawful or
unauthorized acts.
2. That such acts provoke or give occasion for a war
involving or liable to involve the Philippines or
expose Filipino citizens to reprisals on their
persons or property.

Examples:
The raising, without sufficient authorization, of
troops within the Philippines for the service of a
foreign nation against another nation.

6
 The public destruction of the flag or seal of a
foreign state or the public manifestations of hostility
to the head or ambassador of another state.
Committed in time of peace.
The crime of inciting to war or giving motives
for reprisals is committed in time of peace.
Penalty is higher when the offender is a public
officer or employee.
If the offender is a private individual, the penalty
is prision mayor. If the offender is a public officer or
employee, the penalty is reclusion temporal.

Art. 119. Violation of neutrality. - The penalty

of prision correccional shall be inflicted upon
anyone who, on the occasion of a war in which
the Government is not involved, violates any
regulation issued by competent authority for the
purpose of enforcing neutrality.

Elements:
1. That there is a war in which the Philippines is
not involved;
2.That there is a regulation issued by purpose of
enforcing neutrality;
3.That the offender violates such regulation.

Neutrality, defined.
A nation or power which takes no part in a
contest of arms going on between others is referred
to as neutral. (Burril, L.D.)
There must be regulation issued by competent
authority for the enforcement of neutrality.
It is the violation of such regulation which
constitutes the crime.
7
 Art. 120. Correspondence with hostile country.
– Any person, who in time of war, shall have
correspondence with an enemy country or
territory occupied by enemy troops shall be
punished:
1. By prision correccional, if the
correspondence has been prohibited by the
Government;
2. By prision mayor, if the correspondence be
carried on in ciphers or conventional signs; and
3. By reclusion temporal, if notice or
information be given thereby which might be
useful to the enemy. If the offender intended to
aid the enemy by giving such notice or
information, he shall suffer the penalty of
reclusion temporal to death.

Elements:
1. That it is in time of war in which the Philippines
is involved;
2. That the offender makes correspondence with an
enemy country or
territory occupied by enemy troops;
3. That the correspondence is either –
(a) prohibited by the Government, or
(b) carried on in ciphers or conventional signs, or
(c) containing notice or information which might be
useful to the
enemy.
Meaning of "correspondence."
Correspondence is communication by means of
letters; or it may refer to the letters which pass

8
between those who have friendly or business
relations.
Circumstances qualifying the offense.
The following must concur together:
a. That the notice or information might be useful
to the enemy.
b. That the offender intended to aid the enemy.

Note: If the offender intended to aid the enemy

by giving such notice or information, the crime
amounts to treason; hence, the penalty is the same as
that for treason.

Art. 121. Flight to enemy's country. - The

penalty of arresto mayor shall be inflicted upon
any person who, owing allegiance to the
Government, attempts to flee or go to an enemy
country when prohibited by competent authority.

Elements:
1.That there is a war in which the Philippines is
involved;
2.That the offender must be owing allegiance to
the Government;
3.That the offender attempts to flee or go to enemy
country;
4.That going to enemy country is prohibited by
competent authority.
Note:
1.An alien resident may be guilty of flight to
enemy country.
2.Mere attempt to flee or go to enemy country
consummates the crime.

9
 Art. 122. Piracy in general and mutiny on the
high seas or in Philippine waters. - The penalty of
reclusion perpetua shall be inflicted upon any
person who, on the high seas or in Philippine
waters, shall attack or seize a vessel or, not being
a member of its complement nor a passenger,
shall seize the whole or part of the cargo of said
vessel, its equipment, or personal belongings of its
complement or passengers.
The same penalty shall be inflicted in case of
mutiny on the high seas or in Philippine waters.
(As amended by Sec. 3, R.A. No. 7659)

Two ways or modes of committing piracy:

1.By attacking or seizing a vessel on the high seas
or in Philippine waters;
2.By seizing in the vessel while on the high seas or
in Philippine waters the whole or part of its
cargo, its equipment or personal belongings of
its complement or passengers.

Elements of piracy:
1.That a vessel is on the high seas or in Philippine
waters;
2.That the offenders are not members of its
complement or passengers of the vessel;
3.That the offenders (a) attack or seize that vessel,
or (b) seize the whole or part of the cargo of said
vessel, its equipment or personal belongings of
its complement or passengers.

Meaning of "high seas."

It does not mean that the crime be committed
beyond the three-mile limit of any state. It means
10
any waters on the sea coast which are without the
boundaries of low-water mark, although such waters
may be in the jurisdictional limits of a foreign
government. (48 C.J. 1207; footnote 13-a)
Definition of piracy.
It is robbery or forcible depredation on the high
seas, without lawful authority and done with animo
furandi and in the spirit and intention of universal
hostility. (People v. Lol-lo, et al., 43 Phil. 19)

Definition of mutiny.
Mutiny is the unlawful resistance to a superior
officer, or the raising of commotions and
disturbances on board a ship against the authority of
its commander. (Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Vol. 2,
p. 2283)
Piracy distinguished from mutiny.
In piracy, the persons who attack a vessel or
seize its cargo are strangers to said vessels; while in
mutiny, they are members of the crew or passengers.
While the intent to gain is essential in the crime
of piracy, in mutiny, the offenders may only intend
to ignore the ship's officers or they may be prompted
by a desire to commit plunder.
Piracy and Mutiny, when considered as
Terrorism.
Under Republic Act No. 9372, otherwise known
as the "Human Security Act of 2007," approved on
March 6, 2007, a person who commits an act
punishable as piracy and mutiny under Article 122
thereby sowing and creating a condition of
widespread and extraordinary fear and panic
among the populace, in order to coerce the
11
government to give in to an unlawful demand shall
be guilty of the crime of terrorism, and shall suffer
the penalty of forty years of imprisonment, without
the benefit of parole.

Art. 123. Qualified piracy. - The penalty of

reclusion perpetua to death shall be imposed upon
those who commit any of the crimes referred to in
the preceding article, under any of the following
circumstances:
1.Whenever they have seized a vessel by
boarding or firing upon the same;
2. Whenever the pirates have abandoned
their victims without means of saving
themselves; or
3. Whenever the crime is accompanied by
murder, homicide, physical injuries, or rape.
(As amended by R.A. No. 7659)

Piracy or mutiny is, therefore, qualified if any of

the following circumstances is present:
(a) Whenever the offenders have seized the
vessel by boarding or firing upon the same;
(b) Whenever the pirates have abandoned
their victims without means of saving
themselves; or
(c) Whenever the crime is accompanied by
murder, homicide, physical injuries, or
rape.

CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL

LAWS OF THE STATE

12
Section One. - Arbitrary detention and expulsion

Classes of arbitrary detention:

(1) Arbitrary detention by detaining a person
without legal ground. (Art. 124)
(2) Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the
proper judicial authorities. (Art. 125)
(3) Delaying release. (Art. 126)
The penalties for the three classes of arbitrary
detention are the same, as provided in Article 124.
Articles 125 and 126 do not provide penalties for
their violation. They make reference to the penalties
provided for in Article 124.

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 of 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.

13
 The commission of a crime, or violent
insanity or any other ailment requiring the
compulsory confinement of the patient in a
hospital, shall be considered legal grounds for the
detention of any person.

Elements:
1. That the offender if a public officer or employee.
2. That he detains a person.
3. That the detention is without legal grounds.
(U.S. v. Braganza, et al., 10 Phil. 79; Milo v.
Salonga, 152 SCRA 113; Astorga v. People, G.R.
No. 154130, October 1, 2003)

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.

14
 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. (People v. Camerino,
CA-G.R. No. 14207-R, December 14, 1956)
When is there a detention?
Detention is defined as the actual confinement of
a person in an enclosure, or in any manner detaining
and depriving him of his liberty (People v. Gungon,
G.R. No. 119574, March 19 1998, citing People v.
Domasian G.R. No. 95322, March 1, 1993; People
v. Flores, G.R. No. 116488. May 31, 2001) A person
is detained when he is placed in confinement or there
is a restraint on his person. (U.S. v. Cabanag, 8 Phil.
64)
Even if the persons detained could move freely
in and out of their prison cell and could take their
meals outside the prison, nevertheless, if they were
under the surveillance of the guards and they could
not escape for fear of being apprehended again, there
would still be arbitrary detention. (People v.
Camerino, supra.)
Restraint resulting from fear.
Where the accused-mayor refused to allow a
DENR team to go home despite their pleas, and the
refusal was quickly followed by the call for and
arrival of almost a dozen "reinforcements," all armed
with military-issue rifles, who proceeded to encircle
the team, weapons pointed at the complainants and
the witnesses, and the team was instead brought to a
house where after dinner, some of the members were
15
allowed to go down from the house but not to leave
the barangay, and the rest just sat in the house until
2:00 a.m. when they were finally allowed to leave, it
was held that the restraint resulting from fear is
evident. It was not just the presence of the armed
men, but also the evident effect these gunmen had on
the actions of the team which proves that fear was
indeed instilled in the minds of the team members, to
the extent that they felt compelled to stay in the
barangay. The intent to prevent the departure of the
complainants and witnesses against their will is
clear. (Astorga v. People, G.R. No. 154130, October
1, 2003)
"Without legal grounds."
The detention of a person is without legal
ground: (1) when he has not committed any crime
or, at least, there is no reasonable ground for
suspicion that he has committed a crime; or (2) when
he is not suffering from violent insanity or any other
ailment requiring compulsory confinement in a
hospital.
Thus, in the following cases, the detention was
without legal ground:
1. A barrio lieutenant, seeing his servant
quarreling with his daughter, seized the
servant and an hour later sent him to the
Justice of the Peace. The servant was kept in
detention from 5 p.m. to 9 a.m. the next
day when he was released by the Justice of the
Peace.
Held: The barrio lieutenant was guilty of
arbitrary detention, because he detained the offended
party without any reason therefor, such as the
16
commission of the crime, and without having the
authority to do so. (U.S. v. Gellaga, 15 Phil. 120)
Note: Merely quarreling is not a crime,
2. A Manila detective sergeant arrested
Aquilino Taruc because of the suspicion
that he might be implicated in the plot to
assassinate the President and that he
was related to Luis Taruc, a Huk Supremo.
Held: Mere suspicion of his connection with any
murderous plot is no ground recognized by law for
restraining the freedom of any individual.
Lawlessness from above can only lead to chaos and
anarchy. (Taruc v. Carlos, 78 Phil. 876)
3. In overtaking another vehicle, complainant-
driver was not committing or had not
actually committed a crime in the presence of
respondent-judge. Such being the case, the
warrantless arrest and subsequent detention of
complainant were illegal. (Cayao v. del
Mundo, A.M. No. MTJ-93-813, September
15, 1993)
Legal grounds for the detention of any person.
The following are legal grounds for the
detention of any person:
(a) The commission of a crime;
(b) Violent insanity or any other ailment
requiring the compulsory confinement of the
patient in a hospital. (Art. 124, par. 2)
Arrest without warrant is the usual cause of
arbitrary detention.
A peace officer must have a warrant of arrest
properly issued by the court in order to justify an
17
arrest. If there is no such warrant of arrest, the arrest
of a person by a public officer may constitute
arbitrary detention.
Arrest without warrant – When lawful.
A peace officer or a private person may, without
a warrant, arrest a person: (a) When, in his
presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is
actually committing, or is attempting to
commit an offense;
(b) When an offense has in fact just been
committed, and he has probable cause to
believe based on personal knowledge of facts
and circumstances that the person to be
arrested has committed it; and
(c) When the person to be arrested is a
prisoner who has escaped from a penal
establishment or place where he is serving
final judgment or temporarily confined while
his case is pending, or has escaped while
being transferred from one confinement to
another. (Sec. 5, Rule 113, Revised Rules of
Criminal Procedure)
Paragraphs (a) and (b) refer to cases when a
suspect is caught in flagrante delicto or immediately
thereafter, while paragraph (c) refers to escaping
prisoners. (Ilagan v. Enrile, 139 SCRA 349)

Art. 125. Delay in the delivery of detained

persons to the proper judicial authorities. - The
penalties provided in the next preceding article
shall be imposed upon the public officer or
18
employee who shall detain any person for some
legal ground and shall fail to deliver such person
to the proper judicial authorities within the
period of: twelve (12) hours, for crimes or
offenses punishable by light penalties, or their
equivalent; eighteen (18) hours, for crimes or
offenses punishable by correctional penalties, or
their equivalent; and thirty-six (36) hours, for
crimes or offenses punishable by afflictive or
capital penalties, or their equivalent.
In every case, the person detained shall be
informed of the cause of his detention and shall
be allowed, upon his request, to communicate and
confer at any time with his attorney or counsel.
(As amended by E.O. No. 272)

Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
2. That he has detained a person for some legal
ground.
3. That he fails to deliver such person to the proper
judicial authorities within:
a. twelve (12) hours, for crimes or offenses
punishable by light penalties, or their
equivalent; or
b. eighteen (18) hours, for crimes or offenses
punishable by correctional penalties, or their
equivalent; or
c. thirty-six (36) hours, for crimes or offenses
punishable by afflictive or capital
penalties, or their equivalent.

19
If the offender is a private person, the crime is
illegal detention.
A private individual who makes a lawful arrest
must also comply with the requirements prescribed
in Article 125. If he fails to do so, he shall be guilty
of illegal detention (Art. 267 or Art. 268), not
arbitrary detention.
The periods of time in Article 125 were applied
to the arrests made by a private person. (People v.
Sali, et al., C.A., 50 O.G. 5676)
"Shall detain any person for some legal ground."
Under Article 125, the public officer or
employee has detained the offended party for some
legal ground. The detention is legal in the beginning,
because the person detained was arrested under any
of the circumstances where arrest without warrant
is authorized by law. The detention becomes illegal
after a certain period of time, because the offended
party is not delivered to the proper judicial authority,
within the period specified by Article 125.
If the detention of a person is not for some legal
ground, it will be a case under Article 124, not under
Article 125.

Note:
1.Article 125 does not apply when the arrest is
by virtue of a warrant
of arrest.
"Shall fail to deliver such person to the proper
judicial authorities."

20
 It will be noted that what constitutes a violation
of Article 125 is the failure to deliver the person
arrested to the proper judicial authority within the
period specified therein.
The delivery to the judicial authority of a person
arrested without warrant by a peace officer, does not
consist in a physical delivery, but in making an
accusation or charge or filing of an information
against the person arrested with the corresponding
court or judge, whereby the latter acquires
jurisdiction to issue an order of release or of
commitment of the prisoner, because the arresting
officer can not transfer to the judge and the latter
does not assume the physical custody of the person
arrested. (Sayo v. Chief of Police of Manila, 80 Phil.
859)

Art. 126. Delaying release. - The penalties

provided for in Article 124 shall be imposed upon
any public officer or employee who delays for the
period of time specified therein the performance
of any judicial or executive order for the release
of a prisoner or detention prisoner, or unduly
delays the service of the notice of such order to
said prisoner or the proceedings upon any
petition for the liberation of such person.

Three acts are punishable under Article 126.

1. By delaying the performance of a judicial or
executive order for the release of a prisoner.
2. By unduly delaying the service of the notice of
such order to said prisoner. 3. By unduly delaying
21
the proceedings upon any petition for the liberation
of such person.

Elements:
a. That the offender is a public officer or employee;
b. That there is a judicial or executive order for the
release of a prisoner or detention prisoner, or that
there is a proceeding upon a petition for the
liberation of such person.
c. That the offender without good reason delays:
(1) the service of the notice of such order to the
prisoner; or (2) the performance of such judicial or
executive order for the release of the prisoner; or
(3) the proceedings upon a petition for the release
of such person.

Example of delaying release.

For failure to prosecute, because the witness of
the prosecution did not appear, the case was
dismissed and the justice of the peace gave an order
to release the accused. The jailer refused to release
the accused, notwithstanding that order of release,
until after several days.
Wardens and jailers are the public officers most
likely to violate Article 126.
The public officers who are most likely to
commit the offense penalized in Article 126 are the
wardens and peace officers temporarily in charge of
the custody of prisoners or detained persons.

22
 Art. 127. Expulsion. – The penalty of prision
correccional shall be imposed upon any public
officer or employee who, not being thereunto
authorized by law, shall expel any person from
the Philippine Islands or shall compel such
person to change his residence.

Two acts are punishable under Article 127:

1. By expelling a person from the Philippines.
2. By compelling a person to change his residence.

Elements:
a. That the offender is a public officer or employee.
b.That he expels any person from the Philippines,
or compels a person to change his residence.
c. That the offender is not authorized to do so by
law.

What are the crimes known as violation of

domicile?
They are:
1.Violation of domicile by entering a dwelling
against the will of the owner thereof or
making search without previous consent of the
owner. (Art. 128)
2.Search warrants maliciously obtained and
abuse in the service of those legally
obtained. (Art. 129)
3.Searching domicile without witnesses. (Art.
130)

Art. 128. Violation of domicile. - The penalty

of prision correccional in its minimum period
23
shall be imposed upon any public officer or
employee who, not being authorized by judicial
order, shall enter any dwelling against the will of
the owner thereof, search papers or other effects
found therein without the previous consent of
such owner, or, having surreptitiously entered
said dwelling, and being required to leave the
premises, shall refuse to do so.
If the offense be committed in the nighttime,
or if any papers or effects not constituting
evidence of a crime be not returned immediately
after the search made by the offender, the penalty
shall be prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods.

Acts punishable under Article 128.

1. By entering any dwelling against the will of the
owner thereof; or
2. By searching papers or other effects found
therein without the previous consent of such owner;
or
3. By refusing to leave the premises, after having
surreptitiously entered said dwelling and after
having been required to leave the same.
Elements common to three acts:
a. That the offender is a public officer or
employee.
b. That he is not authorized by judicial order to
enter the dwelling and/or to make a search
therein for papers or other effects.
Note:
1.The offender must be a public officer or
employee.

24
 2.A public officer or employee is authorized by
judicial order when he is armed with a search
warrant duly issued by the court. Hence, he is
not being authorized by judicial order, when the
public officer has no search warrant.
3.It will be noted that to constitute a violation of
domicile, the entrance by the public officer or
employee must be against the will of the owner
of the dwelling, which presupposes opposition
or prohibition by said owner, ether express or
implied. If the entrance by the public officer or
employee is only without the consent of the
owner of the dwelling, the crime is not
committed. Neither is the crime committed if the
owner of the dwelling consented to such
entrance. (People v. Luis Sane, C.A., 40 O.G.,
Supp. 5, 113
4.An officer, in order to make an arrest either by
virtue of a warrant, or without a warrant as
provided in Section 5, may break into any
building or enclosure where the person to be
arrested is or is reasonably believed to be, if he
is refused admittance thereto, after announcing
his authority and purpose. (Sec. 11, Rule 113,
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure)
5.A peace officer without search warrant cannot
lawfully enter the dwelling against the will of
the owner, even if he knew that someone in the
dwelling is having unlawful possession of
opium.
Circumstances qualifying the offense:
(1) If the offense is committed at nighttime; or

25
(2) If any papers or effects not constituting evidence
of a crime are not returned immediately after the
search made by the offender.

Art. 129. Search warrants maliciously

obtained, and abuse in the service of those legally
obtained. - In addition to the liability attaching to
the offender for the commission of any other
offense, the penalty of arresto mayor in its
maximum period to prision correccional in its
minimum period and a fine not exceeding 1.000
pesos shall be imposed upon any public officer or
employee who shall procure a search warrant
without just cause, or, having legally procured
the same, shall exceed his authority or use
unnecessary severity in executing the same.

Acts punishable in connection with search

warrants.
1. By procuring a search warrant without just
cause.
2. By exceeding his authority or by using
unnecessary severity in executing
a search warrant legally procured.

Elements of procuring a search warrant without

just cause:
a. That the offender is a public officer or
employee.
b. That he procures a search warrant.
c. That there is no just cause.

Search warrant defined.

26
 A search warrant is an order in writing issued in
the name of the People of the Philippines, signed by
a judge and directed to a peace officer, commanding
him to search for personal property described therein
and bring it before the court. (Sec. 1, Rule 126,
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure)
Personal property to be seized. K
A search warrant may be issued for the search
and seizure of the following personal property:
(a) Subject of the offense;
(b) Stolen or embezzled and other proceeds or
fruits of the offense; or
(c) Used or intended to be used as the means of
committing an offense. (Sec. 3, Rule 126,
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure)
Requisites for issuing search warrant.
A search warrant shall not issue except upon
probable cause in connection with one specific
offense to be determined personally by the judge
after examination under oath or affirmation of the
complainant and the witness he may produce, and
particularly describing the place to be searched and
the things to be seized which may be anywhere in
the Philippines. (Sec. 4, Rule 126, Revised Rules of
Criminal Procedure)
Examination of complainant.
The judge must, before issuing the warrant,
personally examine in the form of searching
questions and answers, in writing and under oath, the
complainant and the witness he may produce on
facts personally known to them and attach to the
record their sworn statements together with any
affidavits submitted. (Sec. 5, Rule 126, Revised
Rules of Criminal Procedure)
27
Right to break door or window to effect search.
The officer, if refused admittance to the place of
directed search after giving notice of his purpose and
authority, may break open any outer or inner door or
window of a house or any part of a house or
anything therein to execute the warrant or liberate
himself or any person lawfully aiding him when
unlawfully detained therein. (Sec. 7, Rule 126,
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure)
Search of house, room or premise to be made in
presence of two witnesses.
No search of a house, room or any other
premises shall be made except in the presence of the
lawful occupant thereof or any member of his family
or in the absence of the latter, in the presence of two
witnesses of sufficient age and discretion residing in
the same locality. (Sec. 8, Rule 126, Revised Rules
of Criminal Procedure)
Validity of search warrant.
A search warrant shall be valid for ten days
from its date. Thereafter, it shall be void. (Sec. 10,
Rule 126, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure)
A receipt for the property seized.
The officer seizing property under the warrant
must give a detailed receipt for the same to the
lawful occupant of the premises in whose presence
the search and seizure were made, or in the absence
of such occupant, must, in the presence of at least
two witnesses of sufficient age and discretion
residing in the same locality, leave a receipt in the
place in which he found the seized property. (Sec.
11, Rule 126, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure)
Probable cause, defined.

28
 It is such reasons, supported by facts and
circumstances, as will warrant a cautious man in the
belief that his action, and the means taken in
prosecuting it, are legally just and proper. (U.S. v.
Addison, 28 Phil. 580; Corro v. Lising, 137 SCRA
541)
Probable cause for a search is defined as such
facts and circumstances which would lead a
reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that
an offense has been committed and that the subject
sought in connection with the offense are in the
place sought to be searched. (Burgos v. Chief of
Staff, 133 SCRA 800)
When is a search warrant said to have been
procured without just cause?
A search warrant is said to have been procured
without just cause when it appears on the face of the
affidavits filed in support of the application therefor,
or through other evidence, that the applicant had
every reason to believe that the search warrant
sought for was unjustified.
Example: A peace officer wanted to verify a
report that some corpse was unlawfully buried in a
monastery. Instead of stating to that effect, he
alleged in an affidavit that opium was hidden in the
premises. If no opium was found, the officer is
guilty under this article. (Guevara)

Art. 130. Searching domicile without

witnesses. - The penalty of arresto mayor in its
medium and maximum periods shall be imposed
upon a public officer or employee who, in cases
where a search is proper, shall search the
domicile, papers, or other belongings of any
29
person, in the absence of the latter, any member
of his family, or in their default, without the
presence of two witnesses residing in the same
locality.

Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer or
employee.
2. That he is armed with search warrant legally
procured.
3. That he searches the domicile, papers, or other
belongings of any person.
4. That the owner, or any member of his family, or
two witnesses residing in the same locality are not
present.
“In cases where a search is proper.”
This clause means that the public officer at the
time of the search is armed with a search warrant
legally procured.
In violation of domicile under Article 128, the
public officer has no authority to make a search; in
searching domicile without witnesses (Art. 130), the
public officer has a search warrant.
“Shall search the domicile, papers, or other
belongings of any person.”
The word “search” means “to go over or look
through for the purpose of finding something; to
examine.” Note that the thing searched by the
offender is the “domicile,” the “papers” or the
“other belongings” of any person. The public
officers may examine the papers for the purpose of
finding in those papers something against their
owner; or his other belongings for the same purpose.
But as the crime defined in Article 130 is one of the
30
forms of violation of domicile, the papers or other
belongings must be in the dwelling of their owner at
the time the search is made.
Article 130 does not apply to searches of
vehicles or other means of transportation because the
searches are not made in the dwelling.

CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER

REBELLION, COUP D'ETAT, SEDITION,

AND DISLOYALTY

Art. 134. Rebellion or insurrection – How

committed. – The crime of rebellion or
insurrection is committed by rising publicly and
taking arms against the Government for the
purpose of removing from the allegiance to said
Government or its laws, the territory of the
Republic of the Philippines or any part thereof,
or any body of land, naval, or other armed forces,
or depriving the Chief Executive or the
Legislature, wholly or partially, of any of their
powers or prerogatives. (As amended by R.A. No.
6968, approved October 24, 1990)

Elements:
1. That there be (a) public uprising, and (b) taking
arms against the Government.
2. That the purpose of the uprising or movement is
either –
31
 a. to remove from the allegiance to said
Government or its laws:
(1) the territory of the Philippines or any
part thereof; or
(2) any body of land, naval or other armed
forces; or
b. to deprive the Chief Executive or Congress,
wholly or partially, of any of their powers
or prerogatives.

Rebellion and insurrection are not synonymous.

The term “rebellion” is more frequently used
where the object of the movement is completely to
overthrow and supersede the existing government;
while the term "insurrection is more commonly
employed in reference to a movement which seeks
merely to effect some change of minor importance,
or to prevent the exercise of governmental authority
with respect to particular matters or subjects. (30
Am. Jur. 1)
Nature of the crime of rebellion.
The crime of rebellion or of inciting it is by
nature a crime of masses, of a multitude. It is a vast
movement of men and a complex net of intrigues
and plots. (People v. Almazan, CA., 37 0.G. 1932)
The word “rebellion" evokes, not merely a
challenge to the constituted authorities, but also civil
war on a bigger or lesser scale. (People v.
Hernandez, 99 Phil. 515)
In rebellion or insurrection, the Revised Penal
Code expressly declares that there must be a public

32
uprising and the taking up of arms. (Cariño v.
People, 7 SCRA 900)
Purpose of the uprising must be shown.
The mere fact that a band of forty men entered
the town and, after attacking the policemen,
kidnapped the municipal president, secretary and
others, without evidence to indicate the motive or
purpose of the accused, does not constitute rebellion.
The crime committed was kidnapping. (U.S.v.
Constantino, et al., 2 Phil. 693)
It is not necessary that the purpose of the
rebellion be accomplished.
The crime of rebellion is complete the very
moment a group of rebels rise publicly and take
arms against the Government, for the purpose of
overthrowing the same by force. It is not necessary,
to consummate rebellion, that the rebels succeed in
overthrowing the Government. Rising publicly and
taking arms against the Government is the
normative element of the offense, while the intent or
purpose to overthrow the Government is the
subjective element. (Guevara)
Rebellion distinguished from Treason.
(a) The levying of war against the Government
would constitute treason when
performed to aid the enemy. It would also constitute
an adherence to the enemy, giving him
aid and comfort. (U.S. v. Lagnason, 3
Phil. 472)
The levying of war against the Government
during peace time for any of the purposes
mentioned in Article 134 is rebellion.

33
 (b) Rebellion always involves taking up arms
against the Government; treason may be
committed by mere adherence to the enemy giving
him aid or comfort.
Note:
Giving aid and comfort is not criminal in
rebellion.
Rebellion distinguished from subversion.
Petitioners contend that rebellion is an element
of the crime of subversion. That contention is not
correct because subversion, like treason, is a crime
against national security. Rebellion is a crime
against public order.
The petitioners were accused of rebellion for
having allegedly undertaken a public uprising to
overthrow the government. In contrast, they were
accused of subversion for allegedly being officers
and ranking members of the Communist Party and
similar subversive groups. (Buscayno v. Military
Commission Nos. 1, 2, 6 and 25, 109 SCRA 273)
Rebellion or Insurrection, when considered as
Terrorism.
Under Republic Act No. 9372, otherwise known
as the "Human Security Act of 2007," approved on
March 6, 2007, a person who commits an act
punishable as rebellion or insurrection, thereby
sowing and creating a condition of widespread and
extraordinary fear and panic among the populace, in
order to coerce the government to give in to an
unlawful demand shall be guilty of the crime of
terrorism. (Sec. 3)

34
 REPUBLIC ACT No. 9372
Human Security Act of 2007
Approved on March 6, 2007

Acts Punishable as Terrorism under Republic

Act No. 9372.
Any person who commits an act punishable
under any of the following provisions of the Revised
Penal Code:
a. Article 122 (Piracy in general and Mutiny in
the High Seas or in the Philippine Waters);
b. Article 134 (Rebellion of Insurrection);
c. Article 134-A (Coup d'Etat), including acts
committed by private persons;
d. Article 248 (Murder);
e. Article 267 (Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention);
f. Article 324 (Crimes Involving Destruction),
or under
(1) Presidential Decree No. 1613 (The Law
on Arson);
(2) Republic Act No. 6969 (Toxic
Substances and Hazardous and Nuclear
Waste Control Act of 1990);
(3) Republic Act No. 5207 (Atomic Energy
Regulatory and Liability Act of
1968);
(4) Republic Act No. 6235 (Anti-Hijacking
Law);

35
 (5) Presidential Decree No. 532 (Anti-
Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery
Law of 1974); and
(6) Presidential Decree No. 1866, as
amended (Decree Codifying the
Laws on Illegal and Unlawful Possession,
manufacture, Dealing in, Acquisition
or Disposition of Firearms, Ammunitions
or Explosives)
thereby sowing and creating a condition of
widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among
the populace, in order to coerce the government to
give in to an unlawful demand shall be guilty of the
crime of terrorism and shall suffer the penalty of
forty (40) years of imprisonment, without the benefit
of parole as provided for under Act No. 4103,
otherwise known as the "Indeterminate Sentence
Law," as amended. (Sec. 3)

Art. 134-A. Coup d'etat – How committed. –

The crime of coup d'etat is a swift attack,
accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat,
strategy or stealth, directed against duly
constituted authorities of the Republic of the
Philippines, or any military camp or installation,
communications networks, public utilities or
other facilities needed for the exercise and
continued possession of power, singly or
simultaneously carried out anywhere in the
Philippines by any person or persons, belonging
to the military or police or holding any public
office or employment, with or without civilian
support or participation, for the purpose of
36
seizing or diminishing state power. (As amended
by R.A. No. 6968)

Elements:
1. That the offender is a person or persons
belonging to the military or police or holding any
public office or employment;
2. That it is committed by means of a swift attack
accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat,
strategy or stealth;
3. That the attack is directed against duly
constituted authorities of the Republic of the
Philippines, or any military camp or installation,
communication networks, public utilities or
other facilities needed for the exercise and
continued possession of power;
4. That the purpose of the attack is to seize or
diminish state power.

With or without civilian participation.

The crime of coup d'etat may be committed with
or without civilian participation.
Coup d'etat, when considered as Terrorism.
Under Republic Act No. 9372, otherwise known
as the "Human Security Act of 2007," approved on
March 6, 2007, a person who commits an act
punishable as coup d'etat under Article 134-A of the
Revised Penal Code, including acts committed by
private persons, thereby sowing and creating a
condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and
panic among the populace, in order to coerce the

37
government to give in to an unlawful demand shall
be guilty of the crime of terrorism. (Sec. 3)

Who are liable for rebellion, insurrection and/or

coup d’etat?
The following are liable for rebellion,
insurrection and/or coup d’etat:
A. The leaders –
i) Any person who (a) promotes, (b) maintains,
or (c) heads a rebellion or insurrection; or
ii) Any person who (a) leads. (b) directs, or (c)
commands others to undertake a coup
d'etat.
B. The participants –
i) Any person who (a) participates, or (b)
executes the commands of others in
rebellion, or insurrection;
ii) Any person in the government service who
(a) participates, or (b) executes directions
or commands of others in undertaking a coup
d'etat;
iii)Any person not in the government service
who (a) participates, (b) supports, (c)
finances, (d) abets, or (e) aids in undertaking a coup
d'etat.

Art. 136. Conspiracy and proposal to commit

coup d'etat, rebellion or insurrection. – The
conspiracy and proposal to commit coup d'etat
shall be punished by prision mayor in its

38
minimum period and a fine which shall not
exceed eight thousand pesos (P8,000.00).
The conspiracy and proposal to commit
rebellion or insurrection shall be punished
respectively, by prision correccional in its
maximum period and a fine which shall not
exceed five thousand pesos (P5.000), and by
prision correccional in its medium period and a
fine not exceeding two thousand pesos (P2.000).
(As amended by R.A. No. 6968)

Two crimes are defined and penalized in this

article.
Conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion are
two different crimes, namely:
(1) Conspiracy to commit rebellion, and
(2) Proposal to commit rebellion.
There is conspiracy to commit rebellion when
two or more persons come to an agreement to rise
publicly and take arms against the Government for
any of the purposes of rebellion and decide to
commit it.
There is proposal to commit rebellion when the
person who has decided to rise publicly and take
arms against the Government for any of the purposes
of rebellion proposes its execution to some other
person or persons.
Note:
1.Merely agreeing and deciding to rise publicly
and take arms against the Government for
the purposes of rebellion or merely proposing

39
 the commission of said acts is already subject
to punishment.
2.No conspiracy when there is no agreement
and no decision to commit rebellion.
Question:
A witness, who testified for the prosecution in a
charge of conspiracy to commit rebellion, stated that
he heard the accused in their conversation saying:
"What a life this is, full of misery, constantly
increasing. When will our wretchedness end? When
will the authorities remedy them? What shall we
do?"
Is there a conspiracy?
None. (1) There was no agreement concerning
the commission of rebellion, and (2) there was no
decision to commit it. The facts do not suffice to
sustain a conviction of the crime of conspiracy to
77overthrow the Government. (U.S. v. Figueras, et
al., 2 Phil. 491)
Art. 137. Disloyalty of public officers or
employees. – The penalty of prision correccional
in its minimum period shall be imposed upon
public officers or employees who have failed to
resist a rebellion by all the means in their power,
or shall continue to discharge the duties of their
offices under the control of the rebels or shall
accept appointment to office under them.
Offender must be a public officer or employee.
The offender must be a public officer or
employee. Hence, if a private individual accepts an
appointment to office under the rebels, he is not
liable under this article.
40
 Acts of disloyalty which are punished:
1. By failing to resist a rebellion by all the means
in their power; or
2. By continuing to discharge the duties of their
offices under the control of the rebels; or
3. By accepting appointment to office under them.
Art. 138. Inciting to rebellion or insurrection. -
The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum
period shall be imposed upon any person who,
without taking arms or being in open hostility
against the Government, shall incite others to the
execution of any of the acts specified in Article
134 of this Code, by means of speeches,
proclamations, writings, emblems, banners or
other representations tending to the same end.
Elements:
1. That the offender does not take arms or is not in
open hostility against the Government;
2. That he incites others to the execution of any of
the acts of rebellion;
3. That the inciting is done by means of speeches,
proclamations, writings, emblems, banners or
other representations tending to the same end.
"Shall incite others to the execution of any of the
acts specified in Article 134 of this Code."
This clause means that the offender shall incite
others to rise publicly and take arms against the
Government for any of the purposes of rebellion.
Inciting to rebellion distinguished from proposal
to commit rebellion.

41
1. In both crimes, the offender induces another to
commit rebellion.
2. In proposal, the person who proposes has
decided to commit rebellion; in inciting to rebellion,
it is not required that the offender has decided to
commit rebellion.
3. In proposal, the person who proposes the
execution of the crime uses secret means; in inciting
to rebellion, the act of inciting is done publicly.

Art. 139. Sedition – How committed. – The

crime of sedition is committed by persons who
rise publicly and tumultuously in order to attain
by force, intimidation, or by other means outside
of legal methods, any of the following objects:
1. To prevent the promulgation or execution
of any law or the holding of any popular election;
2.To prevent the National Government, or
any provincial or municipal government, or any
public officer thereof from freely exercising its or
his functions, or prevent the execution of any
administrative order;
3.To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon
the person or property of any public officer or
employee;
4. To commit, for any political or social end,
any act of hate or revenge against private persons
or any social class; and
5. To despoil, for any political or social end,
any person, municipality or province. or the
National Government (or the Government of the

42
United States) of all its property or any part
thereof. (As amended by C.A. No. 202)

Elements:
1. That the offenders rise (1) publicly, and (2)
tumultuously;
2. That they employ force, intimidation, or other
means outside of legal methods;
3. That the offenders employ any of those means to
attain any of the following objects:
a. To prevent the promulgation or execution of
any law or the holding of any popular
election;
b. To prevent the National Government, or any
provincial or municipal government, or any
public officer thereof from freely exercising its or
his functions, or prevent the execution of
any administrative order; c. To inflict any
act of hate or revenge upon the person or property of
any public officer or employee;
d. To commit, for any political or social end,
any act of hate or revenge against private
persons or any social class; and
e. To despoil, for any political or social end,
any person, municipality or province, or the
National Government of all its property or any part
thereof.

Nature of the crime.

43
 Sedition, in its general sense, is the raising of
commotions or disturbances in the State. (People v.
Cabrera, 43 Phil. 64)
The ultimate object of sedition is a violation of
the public peace or at least such a course of
measures as evidently engenders it. (People v.
Perez, 45 Phil. 599)
What distinguishes sedition from rebellion is the
object or purpose of the uprising.

Sedition distinguished from treason.

Treason, in its more general sense, is the
"violation by a subject of his allegiance to his
sovereign or liege, lord, or to the supreme authority
of the State." (Century Dictionary) Sedition, in its
more general sense, is "the raising of commotions or
disturbances in the State.” (U.S. v. Abad, 1 Phil.
437)

Art. 141. Conspiracy to commit sedition. -

Persons conspiring to commit the crime of
sedition shall be punished by prision correccional
in its medium period and a fine not exceeding
2,000 pesos.

There must be an agreement and a decision to

rise publicly and tumultuously to attain any of
the objects of sedition.
Thus, an agreement and a decision to attain an
object of sedition without any agreement to rise
publicly and tumultuously is not conspiracy to
commit sedition. Such an agreement and decision
44
may constitute a conspiracy to commit direct assault
of the first form (Art. 148), which is not a felony.
There is no proposal to commit sedition.
Article 141 punishes only conspiracy to commit
sedition. Hence, proposal to commit sedition is not
punishable.

Art. 142. Inciting to sedition. – The penalty of

prision correccional in its maximum period and a
fine not exceeding 2,000 pesos shall be imposed
upon any person who, without taking any direct
part in the crime of sedition, should incite others
to the accomplishment of any of the acts which
constitute sedition, by means of speeches,
proclamations, writings, emblems, cartoons,
banners, or other representations tending to the
same end, or upon any person or persons who
shall utter seditious words or speeches, write,
publish, or circulate scurrilous libels against the
Government (of the United States or the
Government of the Commonwealth) of the
Philippines, or any of the duly constituted
authorities thereof, or which tend to disturb or
obstruct any lawful officer in executing the
functions of his office, or which tend to instigate
others to cabal and meet together for unlawful
purposes, or which suggest or incite rebellious
conspiracies or riots, or which lead or tend to stir
up the people against the lawful authorities or to
disturb the peace of the community, the safety
and order of the Government, or who shall
knowingly conceal such evil practices. (As
amended by C.A. No. 202)
45
Different acts of inciting to sedition.
1. Inciting others to the accomplishment of any of
the acts which constitute sedition by means of
speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, etc.
2. Uttering seditious words or speeches which tend
to disturb the public peace.
3. Writing, publishing, or circulating scurrilous
libels against the Government or any of the duly
constituted authorities thereof, which tend to disturb
the public peace.
When the words uttered or speeches delivered or
scurrilous libels published have the tendency to
disturb any lawful officer in executing the functions
of office, etc., it is not necessary, to constitute a
violation of Article 142, that the purpose of the
offender is to accomplish any of the objects of
sedition. The second part of Article 142, which
defines the other modes of committing the crime of
inciting to sedition, does not require it.

Inciting to sedition to accomplish any of its

objects.
Elements:
1. That the offender does not take direct part in the
crime of sedition.
2. That he incites others to the accomplishment of
any of the acts which constitute sedition.
3. That the inciting is done by means of speeches,
proclamations, writings, emblems, cartoons,
banners, or other representations tending to the same
en

46
 ASSAULT UPON, AND RESISTANCE AND
DISOBEDIENCE TO, PERSONS IN
AUTHORITY AND THEIR AGENTS

Art. 148. Direct assaults. – Any person or

persons who, without a public uprising, shall
employ force or intimidation for the attainment
of any of the purposes enumerated in defining the
crimes of rebellion and sedition, or shall attack,
employ force, or seriously intimidate or resist any
person in authority or any of his agents, while
engaged in the performance of official duties, or
on occasion of such performance, shall suffer the
penalty of prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods and a fine not exceeding 1,000
pesos, when the assault is committed with a
weapon or when the offender is a public officer or
employee, or when the offender lays hands upon
a person in authority. If none of these
circumstances be present, the penalty of prision
correccional in its minimum period and a fine not
exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed.

Additional penalty for attacking ambassador or

minister.
Any person who assaults, strikes, wounds or in
any other manner offers violence to the person of an
ambassador or a public minister in violation of the
law of nations, shall be imprisoned not more than
three years and fined not exceeding two hundred
pesos, in the discretion of the court, in addition to
the penalties that may be imposed under the Revised
Penal Code. (Sec. 6, R.A. No. 75)
47
Direct assaults are different from ordinary
assault without intent to kill or physical injuries
under Articles 263 to 266.
Direct assaults are crimes against public order;
ordinary assault under Articles 263 to 266 are crimes
against persons.
Direct assaults are triable by the Court of First
Instance (now. Regional Trial Court). (Villanueva v.
Ortiz, 108 Phil. 493; Salabsalo v. Angcoy 108 Phil.
649)
Two ways of committing the crime of direct
assaults:
1.Without public uprising, by employing force
or intimidation the attainment of any of the purposes
enumerated in defining the crimes of rebellion and
sedition.
2. Without public uprising, by attacking, by
employing force, or seriously intimidating or
seriously resisting any person in authority or any of
his agents, while engaged in the performance of
official duties, or on the occasion of such
performance.
Elements of the first form of direct assault:
1. That the offender employs force or intimidation.
2. That the aim of the offender is to attain any of
the purposes of the crime of rebellion or any of
the objects in the crime of sedition.
3. That there is no public uprising.

Examples of the first form of direct assault:

U.S. v. Dirain
(4 Phil. 541)

48
 Facts: The chief of police, accompanied by four
policemen, all armed, went to the house of the
municipal president and compelled him by force to
go to the municipal building, where they kept him
for four hours, because their salaries had been in
arrears for some time and they had been unable to
secure payment of them from the president. After the
relatives of the president sent him money sufficient
to pay the salaries, he was allowed to depart.
Held: That these facts constitute the commission
of the crime charged in the complaint.
There is force in this case. But there is no public
uprising. When the accused. compelled by force the
municipal president to go with them to the municipal
building and detained him there, they inflicted an act
of hate of revenge upon a public officer. This is one
of the objects of sedition which the accused aimed to
attain.
Elements of the Second form of direct assault:
1. That the offender (a) makes an attack, (b) employs
force, (c) makes a serious intimidation, or (d)
makes a serious resistance.
2.That the person assaulted is a person in authority
or his agent.
3. That at the time of the assault the person in
authority or his agent (a) is engaged in the actual
performance of official duties, or that he is assaulted,
(b) by reason of the past performance of official
duties.
4.That the offender knows that the one he is
assaulting is a person in authority or his agent in the
exercise of his duties.
5. That there is no public uprising.

49
First element. – The offender makes an attack,
employs force, etc.
“Shall attack."
The word "attack" includes any offensive or
antagonistic movement or action of any kind.
"Employ force."
What degree of force is necessary in direct
assault?
If the offended party is only an agent of a
person in authority, the force employed must be of a
serious character as to indicate determination to
defy the law and its representative at all hazards.

Art. 149. Indirect assaults. – The penalty of

prision correccional in its minimum and medium
periods and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall
be imposed upon any person who shall make use
of force or intimidation upon any person coming
to the aid of the authorities or their agents on
occasion of the commission of any of the crimes
defined in the next preceding article.

Elements:
1. That a person in authority or his agent is the
victim of any of the forms of direct assault
defined in Article 148.
2. That a person comes to the aid of such authority
or his agent.
3. That the offender makes use of force or
intimidation upon such person coming to the aid of
the authority or his agent.
Note:
1.Indirect assault can be committed only when
a direct assault is also committed.
50
 2.The offended party in indirect assaults may
be private person.
Art. 151. Resistance and disobedience to a person
in authority or the agents of such person. – The
penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding
500 pesos shall be more upon any person who not
being included in the provisions the preceding
articles shall resist or seriously disobey person in
authority, or the agents of such person, while
engaged in the performance of official duties.
When the disobedience to an agent of a
person in authority is not of a serious nature, the
penalty of arrest menor or a fine ranging from 10
to 100 pesos shall be imposed upon the offender.

Elements of resistance and serious disobedience

(par. 1):
1. That a person in authority or his agent is engaged
in the performance of official duty or gives a
lawful order to the offender.
2.That the offender resists or seriously disobeys
such person in authority or his agent.
3. That the act of the offender is not included in the
provisions of Articles 148, 149, and 150.
Concept of the offense of resistance and
disobedience.
The juridical conception of the crime of
resistance and disobedience to a person in authority
or his agents consists in a failure to comply with
orders directly issued by the authorities in the
exercise of their official duties. Failure to comply
with legal provisions of a general character or with
judicial decisions merely declaratory of rights or
51
obligations, or violations of prohibitory decisions do
not constitute the crime of disobedience to the
authorities. (U.S. v. Ramayrat, 22 Phil. 183)
"While engaged in the performance of official
duties."
The phrase indicates the rule that in the crime of
resistance and disobedience, the person in authority
or the agent of such person must be in the actual
performance of his official duties. This is so,
because there can be no resistance or disobedience
when there is nothing to resist or to disobey. But
when a person in authority or his agent is in the
performance of his duty or gives an order and the
performance of duty is resisted or the order is
disobseyed, then the crime is committed.
The disobedience contemplated consists in the
failure or refusal to obey a direct order from the
authority or his agent.
The accused must have knowledge that the
person arresting him is a peace officer.
Thus, in a case where the accused thought that
the persons arresting him were bandits, since they
did not identify themselves and state beforehand
their mission, it was held that his resistance did not
constitute an offense. (U.S. v. Bautista, 31 Phil. 308)
Justified resistance.
The action of the accused in laying his hands on
the customs secret agent, who had no right to make
the search, was an adequate defense to repel the
aggression of the latter, who had seized him by the
arm to purpose of searching him.
The accused was not subject to search because
when the customs authorities permitted him to land

52
in Manila, he ceased to be a passenger liable to
search. (People v. Chan Fook, 42 Phil. 230)
Example of resistance and serious disobedience.
The case of U.S. v. Tabiana. 37 Phil. 515. where
the accused struck the policeman on the breast with
a fist when the latter was arresting the said accused,
is an example of resistance and serious
disobedience.
The policeman was in the performance of his
duty when he was arresting the accused. The violent
refusal of the accused to be arrested made him liable
under par. 1 of Article 151.

Elements of simple disobedience (par. 2).

1. That an agent of a person in authority is engaged
in the performance of official duty or gives a
lawful order to the offender.
2. That the offender disobeys such agent of a
person in authority.
3. That such disobedience is not of a serious
nature.

Art. 152. Persons in Authority and Agents of

Persons in Authority – Who shall be deemed as
such. – In applying the provisions of the
preceding and other articles of this Code, any
person directly vested with jurisdiction, whether
as an individual or as a member of some court or
government corporation, board, or commission,
shall be deemed a person in authority. A
barangay captain and a barangay chairman shall
also be deemed a person in authority.
Any person who, by direct provision of law or
by election or by appointment by competent
53
authority, is charged with the maintenance of
public order and the protection and security of
life and property, such as a barrio councilman,
barrio policeman and barangay leader, and any
person who comes to the aid of persons in
authority, shall be deemed agent of a person in
authority.
In applying the provisions of Articles 148 and
151 of this Code, teachers, professors, and
persons charged with the supervision of public or
duly recognized private schools, colleges and
universities, and lawyers in the actual
performance of their professional duties or on the
occasion of such performance shall be deemed
persons in authority. (As amended by B.P. Blg.
873, approved June 12, 1985)

A person in authority is one "directly vested with

jurisdiction."
By "directly vested with jurisdiction” is meant
the power and authority to govern and execute the
laws.
The following are persons in authority:
1. The municipal mayor. (U.S. u. Gumban, 39 Phil.
761; People v. Bondoc, et al., 47 0.G. 412)
2. Division superintendent of schools. (People v.
Benitez, 73 Phil. 671)
3. Public and private school teachers. (Art. 152, as
amended by R.A. No. 1978)
4. Teacher-nurse. (Sarcepuedes v. People, 90 Phil.
228)
5. President of sanitary division. (People v.
Quebral, et al., 73 Phil. 640)

54
6. Provincial fiscal. (People v. Francisco, C.A., 48
O.G. 4423)
7. Justice of the Peace. (U.S. v. Garcia, 20 Phil.
358)
8. Municipal councilor. (People v. Yosoya, CA-
G.R. No. 8522-R, May 26, 1955)
9. Barrio captain and barangay chairman. (Art.
152, as amended by Presidential Decree No.
299)
To be an agent of a person in authority, one must
be charged with (1) the maintenance of public
order, and (2) the protection and security of life
and property.
Thus, a policeman or a constabulary soldier is an
agent of a person authority, because he is charged
with the maintenance of public order and the
protection and security of life and property. The
municipal treasurer is also such agent of a person in
authority, because in addition to the fact that he is a
deputy ex oficio of the provincial treasurer, a person
in authority, he is charged with the protection and
security of government property.
Any person who comes to the aid of persons in
authority is an agent of on in authority. (Art. 152, as
amended, 2nd paragraph)
Professors of private colleges and universities,
etc. are persons in authority for the purpose of
Articles 148 and 151.
Teachers, professors and persons charged with
the supervision of public or duly recognized private
schools, colleges and universities are deemed
persons in authority in applying the provisions of
Articles 148 and 151.

55
Are teachers, professors, etc., persons in
authority for purposes of Article 149?
The third paragraph of Article 152 states that "in
applying the provisions of Articles 148 and 151 of
this Code," they are persons in authority. But such
statement is not exclusive of Article 149 for it
merely emphasizes the application of Articles 148
and 151.

PUBLIC DISORDERS

What are the crimes classified under public

disorders?
They are:
1. Tumults and other disturbances of public
order. (Art. 153)
2. Unlawful use of means of publication and
unlawful utterances. (Art. 154)
3. Alarms and scandals. (Art. 155)
4. Delivering prisoners from jails. (Art. 156)

Art. 153. Tumults and other disturbances of

public order – Tumultuous disturbance or
interruption liable to cause disturbance. — The
penalty of arresto mayor in its medium period to
prision correccional in its minimum period and a
fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos shall be imposed
upon any person who shall cause any serious
disturbance in a public place, office or
establishment, or shall interrupt or disturb public
performances, functions or gatherings, or
peaceful meetings, if the act is not included in the
provisions of Articles 131 and 132.

56
 The penalty next higher in degree shall be
imposed upon persons causing any disturbance
or interruption of a tumultuous character.
The disturbance or interruption shall be
deemed to be tumultuous if caused by more than
three persons who are armed or provided with
means of violence.
The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed
upon any person who in any meeting, association,
or public place, shall make any outcry tending to
incite rebellion or sedition or in such place shall
display placards or emblems which provoke a
disturbance of the public order.
The penalty of arresto menor and a fine not to
exceed 200 pesos shall be imposed upon those
persons who in violation of the provisions
contained in the last clause of Article 85, shall
bury with pomp the body of a person who has
been legally executed.

What are tumults and other disturbances of

public order?
They are:
1. Causing any serious disturbance in a public
place, office or establishment;
2. Interrupting or disturbing performances,
functions or gatherings, or peaceful
meetings, if the act is not included in
Articles 131 and 132;
3. Making any outcry tending to incite
rebellion or sedition in any meeting,
association or public place;

57
 4. Displaying placards or emblems which
provoke a disturbance of public order in
such place;
5. Burying with pomp the body of a person
who has been legally executed.

“Serious disturbance" must be planned or

intended.
Where on the evening of the day before the
election, a party of 100 persons composed mostly of
partisans of a candidate for the office of municipal
president, marched down the street and stopped in
front of a house where a public meeting of another
candidate was being held and some words passed
between the members of the crowd on the street and
the people at the windows upstairs where the
meeting was being held, but no attempt was made by
the party outside to enter the house or to disturb the
meeting inside by any concerted action, other than
by standing in a large crowd about the doors of the
house in such a way as to disturb the attention of
those attending the meeting inside, it was held that
there being only some slight disturbance and that
partisan feeling was running very high at the time,
the party outside the house did not plan a serious
disturbance or intend that one should take place. The
accused were found guilty only of alarm (now
punished under Art. 155) and were fined P5.00 each.
(U.S. v. Domingo, 19 Phil. 69)
Meaning of "outcry.”
The word "outcry" in this article means to shout
subversive or provocative words tending to stir up
the people to obtain by means of force or violence
any of the objects of rebellion or sedition.
58
 Inciting to sedition or rebellion distinguished
from public disorder.
Question: When may an outcry or displaying of
emblems or placards be a crime of inciting to
rebellion or a crime of inciting to sedition, and when
may it be considered a simple public disorder under
paragraph 4 of Article 153?
Answer: For an outcry or the displaying of
emblems or placards to constitute inciting to commit
rebellion or sedition, it is necessary that the offender
should have done the act with the idea aforethought
of inducing his hearers or readers to commit the
crime of rebellion or sedition.
But if the outcry is more or less unconscious
outburst which, although rebellious or seditious in
nature, is not intentionally calculated to induce
others to commit rebellion or sedition, it is only
public disorder.
Circumstance qualifying the disturbance or
interruption.
The penalty next higher in degree shall be
imposed upon persons causing any disturbance or
interruption of a tumultuous character.
Definition of the term "tumultuous."
The disturbance or interruption shall be deemed
to be tumultuous if caused by more than three
persons who are armed or provided with means of
violence.
One who fired a submachine gun to cause
disturbance, but ted serious physical injuries on
another, may be prosecuted for two crimes.
The one who fired the submachine gun
committed two offenses (causing serious disturbance
in a public place, the people present becoming
59
panicky and terrified, and serious physical injuries
through reckless imprudence), although they arose
from the same act of the offender. (People v.
Bacolod, 89 Phil. 621)

Art. 154. Unlawful use of means of publication

and unlawful utterances. – The penalty of arresto
mayor and a fine ranging from 200 to 1,000 pesos
shall be imposed upon:
1. Any person who by means of printing,
lithography, or any other means of publication
shall publish or cause to be published as news any
false news which may endanger the public order,
or cause damage to the interest or credit of the
State;
2. Any person who by the same means, or by
words, utterances or speeches, shall encourage
disobedience to the law or to the constituted
authorities or praise, justify, or extol any act
punished by law;
3. Any person who shall maliciously publish
or cause to be published any official resolution or
document without proper authority, or before
they have been published officially; or
4. Any person who shall print, publish, or
distribute or cause to be printed, published, or
distributed books, pamphlets, periodicals, or
leaflets which do not bear the real printer's name,
or which are classified as anonymous. (As
amended by C.A. No. 202.)

Acts punished as unlawful use of means of

publication and unlawful utterances:

60
(1) By publishing or causing to be published, by
means of printing, lithography or any other means
of publication, as news any false news which may
endanger the public order, or cause damage to
the interest or credit of the State.
(2) By encouraging disobedience to the law or to
the constituted authorities or by praising,
justifying or extolling any act punished by law, by
the same means or by words, utterances or
speeches.
(3) By maliciously publishing or causing to be
published any official resolution or document
without proper authority, or before they have been
published officially.
(4) By printing, publishing or distributing (or
causing the same) books, pamphlets, periodicals,
or leaflets which do not bear the real printer's
name, or which are classified as anonymous.
The offender must know that the news is false.
If the offender does not know that the news is
false, he is not liable under this article, there being
no criminal intent on his part.
"Which may endanger the public order," etc.
If there is no possibility of danger to the public
order or of causing damage to the interest or credit
of the State by the publication of the false news,
Article 154 is not applicable.
Example of No. 2:
Defendant distributed leaflets urging the people
to disobey and resist the execution of that portion of
the National Defense Act requiring compulsory
military training. He was convicted of inciting to
sedition by the trial court.

61
 Held: The crime is not inciting to sedition. The
acts charged which are subversive in nature fall
under paragraph 2 of Article 154. (People v.
Arrogante, C.A., 38 O.G. 2974)

Art. 155. Alarms and scandals. – The penalty

of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos
shall be imposed upon:
1. Any person who within any town or public
place, shall discharge any firearm, rocket,
firecracker, or other explosive calculated to cause
alarm or danger;
2. Any person who shall instigate or take an
active part in any charivari or other disorderly
meeting offensive to another or prejudicial to
public tranquility;
3. Any person who, while wandering about at
night or while engaged in any other nocturnal
amusements, shall disturb the public peace; or
4. Any person who, while intoxicated or
otherwise, shall cause any disturbance or scandal
in public places, provided that the circumstances
of the case shall not make the provisions of
Article 153 applicable.

Acts punished as alarms and scandals.

1. Discharging any firearm, rocket, firecracker, or
other explosive within any town or public place,
calculated to cause (which produces) alarm or
danger.
2. Instigating or taking an active part in any charivari
or other disorderly meeting offensive to another or
prejudicial to public tranquility.

62
3. Disturbing the public peace while wandering
about at night or while engaged in any other
nocturnal amusements.
4.Causing any disturbance or scandal in public
places while intoxicated or otherwise, provided
Article 153 is not applicable.

"Shall discharge any firearm."

Under paragraph No. 1, the discharge of the
firearm should not be aimed at a person; otherwise,
the offense would fall under Article 254, punishing
discharge of firearm.
"Calculated to cause alarm or danger" should be
"which produces alarm or danger."
The phrase "calculated to cause alarm or danger"
in paragraph No. 1 is a wrong translation of the
Spanish text which reads "que produzca alarma o
peligro."
Hence, it is the result, not the intent, that counts.
The act must produce alarm or danger as a
consequence.
Is the discharge of firecrackers or rockets during
fiestas or festive occasions covered by paragraph
1 of Article 155?
Viada opined that it is not covered by the
provision. (3 Viada, Codigo Penal, 4th Ed., pp. 711-
712)
"Charivari," defined.
The term "charivari” includes a medley of
discordant voices, a mock serenade of discordant
noises made on kettles, tins, horns, etc., designed to
annoy and insult.

63
 Note: The reason for punishing instigating or
taking active part in charivari and other disorderly
meeting is to prevent more serious disorders.
Disturbance of serious nature falls under Article
155.
If the disturbance is of a serious nature, the case
will fall under Article 153, not under par. 4 of this
article.
The act of a person who hurled a general insult
at everybody, there being 30 persons in the hall, and
challenged the owner of the billiard hall to a fight,
causing commotion and disorder so that the billiard
game had to be stopped momentarily, constitutes
merely a violation of Article 155, par. 4, not of
Article 153. While the billiard hall is a public place
there was no serious public disorder caused. (People
v. Gangay, C.A., 40 0.G., Supp. 12, 171)

Art. 156. Delivering prisoners from jail. – The

penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period
to prision correccional in its minimum period
shall be imposed upon any person who shall
remove from any jail or penal establishment any
person confined therein or shall help the escape
of such person, by means of violence, intimidation
or bribery. If other means are used, the penalty
of arresto mayor, shall be imposed.
If the escape of the prisoner shall take place
outside of said establishments by taking the
guards by surprise, the same penalties shall be
imposed in their minimum period.

64
Elements:
1. That there is a person confined in a jail or penal
establishment.
2. That the offender removes therefrom such person,
or helps the escape of such person.
Prisoner may be under detention only.
The person confined may be a mere detention
prisoner. Of course, the prisoner may also be by
final judgment.
Hospital or asylum considered extension of jail or
prison.
This article applies even if the prisoner is in the
hospital or asylum when he is removed or when the
offender helps his escape, because it is considered as
an extension of the penal institution. (Albert)
Offender is usually an outsider.
The offense under this article is usually
committed by an outsider who removes from jail any
person therein confined or helps him escape.
It would seem that Article 156 may also apply to
an employee of the penal establishment who helps
the escape of a person confined therein, provided
that he does not have the custody or charge of such
person. Article 156 may also apply to a prisoner who
helps the escape of another prisoner. The offender
under Article 156 is “any person."
If the offender is a public officer who had the
prisoner in his custody or charge, he is liable for
infidelity in the custody of a prisoner. (Art. 223)
The guard of the jail, who is off duty, may be held
liable for delivering prisoner from jail.

65
 A policeman assigned to the city jail as a guard,
who, while he was off duty, brought recently released
prisoner inside the jail to substitute for a detention
prisoner whom he later on brought out of jail,
returning said prisoner inside the jail about 5 hours
thereafter, may be held liable for the crime of
delivering prisoners from jail as defined and
penalized under Article 156 of the Revised Penal
Code and not for infidelity in the custody of
prisoners defined and penalized under Article 223.
(People v. Del Barrio, et al., C.A., 60 O.G. 3908)
Liability of the prisoner who escapes.
If the prisoner removed or whose escape is made
possible by the commission of the crime of
delivering prisoner from jail is a detention prisoner,
such prisoner is not criminally liable. A prisoner is
criminally liable for leaving the penal institution
only when there is evasion of the service of his
sentence, which can be committed only by a convict
by final judgment.

EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE

Three kinds of evasion of the service of the

sentence.
They are:
1. Evasion of service of sentence by escaping
during the term of his sentence. (Art. 157)
2. Evasion of service of sentence on the occasion
of disorders. (Art. 158)

66
3. Other cases of evasion of service of sentence, by
violating the conditions of conditional pardon.
(Art. 159)

Art. 157. Evasion of service of sentence. – The

penalty of prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods shall be imposed upon any
convict who shall evade service of his sentence by
escaping during the term of his imprisonment by
reason of final judgment. However, if such
evasion or escape shall have taken place by
means of unlawful entry, by breaking doors,
windows, gates, walls, roofs, or floors, or by using
picklocks, false keys, disguise, deceit, violence or
intimidation, or through connivance with other
convicts or employees of the penal institution, the
penalty shall be prision correccional in its
maximum period.

Elements:
1. That the offender is a convict by final judgment.
2. That he is serving his sentence which consists in
deprivation of liberty.
3. That he evades the service of his sentence by
escaping during the term of his sentence.

"By escaping during the term of his

imprisonment."
The word "imprisonment" in the phrase quoted
is not the correct anslation. The Spanish text uses the
phrase "sufriendo privacion de libertad.” Hence, it

67
should be “by escaping during the term of his
sentence which consists in deprivation of liberty."
Meaning of the term "escape."
The three prisoners-accused, with neither escort
nor guard, were seen “loitering in the premises of
the courthouse” which was about 600 meters from
the city jail.
Did the appellants escape?
The term "escape” has been defined as to "flee
from; to avoid; to get out of the way, as to flee to
avoid arrest." (Black's Law Dictionary, 4th ed., p.
640) As correctly pointed out by appellee in
recommending the acquittal of these appellants, the
established facts belie any escape or even mere
intention to escape; indeed, if escape were the
purpose of the appellants, they certainly would not
have loitered in the premises of the courthouse –
especially considering its proximity to the city jail –
where they could easily be spotted and apprehended,
as they in fact were. (People v. Lauron, et al., C.A.,
60 O.G. 4983)
Circumstances qualifying the offense.
If such evasion or escape takes place –
1. By means of unlawful entry (this should be
"by scaling”);
2. By breaking doors, windows, gates, walls,
roofs or floors;
3. By using picklocks, false keys, disguise,
deceit, violence or intimidation; or
4. Through connivance with other convicts or
employees of the penal institution.

68
“Unlawful entry."
The Spanish text uses the word “escalamiento.”
Thus, the crime is qualified if committed by
climbing or scaling the wall.

Art. 158. Evasion of service of sentence on the

occasion of disorders, conflagrations, earthquakes,
or other calamities. - A convict, who shall evade
the service of his sentence, by leaving the penal
institution where he shall have been confined, on
the occasion of disorder resulting for
conflagration, earthquake, explosion, or similar
catastrophe, or during a mutiny in which he has
not participated, shall suffer an increase of one-
fifth of the time still remaining to be served under
the original sentence, which in no case shall
exceed six months, if he shall fail to give himself
up to the authorities within forty-eight hours
following the issuance of a proclamation by the
Chief Executive announcing the passing away of
such calamity.
Convicts who, under the circumstances
mentioned in the preceding paragraph, shall give
themselves up to the authorities within the above
mentioned period of 48 hours, shall be entitled to
the deduction provided in Article 98.

Elements:
1.That the offender is a convict by final judgment,
who is confined in a penal institution.
2.That there is disorder, resulting from –
a. conflagration,
69
 b. earthquake,
c. explosion,
d. similar catastrophe, or
e. mutiny in which he has not participated.
3.That the offender evades the service of his
sentence by leaving the penal institution where he
is confined, on the occasion of such disorder or
during the mutiny.
4.That the offender fails to give himself up to the
authorities within 48 hours following the issuance
of a proclamation by the Chief Executive
announcing the passing away of such calamity.
The offender must be a convict by final
judgment.
Although Article 158 is silent, it is required that
the convict must be one by final judgment, because
only a convict by final judgment can "evade the
service of his sentence.”
The convict must leave the penal institution.
What is punished is not the leaving of the penal
institution, but the failure of the convict to give
himself up to the authorities within 48 hours after
the proclamation announcing the passing away of
the calamity.
Note the fourth element of Article 158 which
states the manner the offense is committed.
Although Article 158 says, "a convict who shall
evade the service of his sentence by leaving the
penal institution,” such clause is qualified by another
clause, “if he shall fail to give himself up to the
authorities within forty-eight hours x x x."

70
If the offender fails to give himself up, he gets an
increased penalty.
The penalty is that the accused shall suffer an
increase of 1/5 of the time still remaining to be
served under the original sentence, not to exceed six
months.
If the offender gives himself up he is entitled to a
deduction of 175 of his sentence.
If he gives himself up to the authorities within
48 hours, he shall be entitled to 1/5 deduction of the
period of his sentence. (Art. 98)
"Mutiny" in this article implies an organized
unlawful resistance to a superior officer; a
sedition; a revolt.
Mutiny implies an organized unlawful resistance
to a superior officer; a sedition; a revolt. (People v.
Padilla, C.A., 46 O.G. 2151)
Thus, there is no mutiny if the prisoners
disarmed the guards and escaped, because the guards
are not their superior officers. In such case, the
prisoners who surrendered to a barrio lieutenant and
then to the police authorities, after slipping away
from the escapists, are not entitled to a reduction of
1/5 of their original sentence.
Such prisoners could be held liable under Article
157 for evasion of service of sentence.
In the case of People v. Padilla, supra., the
accused was not held liable for evasion of service of
sentence under Article 157, because he acted under
the influence of uncontrollable fear of an equal or
greater injury, the escapists having threatened to
shoot at whoever remained in the jail.
71
Nature of conditional pardon – it is a contract.
A conditional pardon is a contract between the
Chief Executive, who grants the pardon, and the
convict, who accepts it. Since it is a contract, the
pardoned convict is bound to fulfill its conditions
and accept all its consequences, not as he chooses,
but according to its strict terms. (People v. Pontillas,
65 Phil. 659)
Elements of the offense of violation of conditional
pardon.
1. That the offender was a convict.
2. That he was granted a conditional pardon by the
Chief Executive.
3.That he violated any of the conditions of such
pardon.
Two penalties are provided for in this article.
a.Prision correccional in its minimum period - if the
penalty remitted does not exceed 6 years.
b.The unexpired portion of his original sentence – if
the penalty remitted is higher than 6 years.

Quasi-recidivism is a special aggravating

circumstance where a person, after having been
convicted by final judgment, shall commit a new
felony before beginning to serve such sentence, or
while serving the same. He shall be punished by the
maximum period of the penalty prescribed by law
for the new felony.

Elements:

72
1. That the offender was already convicted by final
judgment of one offense.
2. That he committed a new felony before beginning
to serve such sentence or while serving the same.
Quasi-recidivism, distinguished from reiteracion.
The aggravating circumstance of "reiteracion”
requires that the offender against whom it is
considered shall have served out his sentences for
the prior offenses. Here, all the accused were yet
serving their respective sentences at the time of the
commission of the crime of murder. The special
aggravating circumstance of quasi-recidivism (Art.
160, R.P.C.) was correctly considered against all the
accused. (People v. Layson, et al., L-25177, October
31, 1969, 30 SCRA 93)

CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST

FORGERIES

What are the crimes called forgeries?

They are:
1. Forging the seal of the Government, signature or
stamp of the Chief Executive. (Art. 161)
2. Counterfeiting coins. (Art. 163)
3. Mutilation of coins. (Art. 164)
4. Forging treasury or bank notes or other
documents payable to bearer. (Art. 166)
5. Counterfeiting instruments not payable to
bearer. (Art. 167)

73
6. Falsification of legislative documents. (Art. 170)
7. Falsification by public officer, employee or
notary or ecclesiastical minister. (Art. 171)
8. Falsification by private individuals. (Art. 172)
9. Falsification of wireless, cable, telegraph and
telephone messages. (Art. 173)
10. Falsification of medical certificates, certificates
of merit or service. (Art. 174)

Section One. – Forging the seal of the

Government of the Philippine
Islands, the signature or stamp of the Chief
Executive.

Art. 161. Counterfeiting the great seal of the

Government of the Philippine Islands, forging the
signature or stamp of the Chief Executive. - The
penalty of reclusion temporal shaII be imposed
upon any person who shall forge the Great Seal
of the Government of the Philippine Islands or
the signature or stamp of the Chief Executive.

Acts punished:
1. Forging the Great Seal of the Government of the
Philippines.
2. Forging the signature of the President.
3. Forging the stamp of the President.

Art. 162. Using forged signature or counterfeit

seal or stamp. – The penalty of prision mayor shall
be imposed upon any person who shall knowingly
74
make use of the counterfeit seal or forged
signature or stamp mentioned in the preceding
article.

Elements:
1. That the Great Seal of the Republic was
counterfeited or the signature or stamp of the Chief
Executive was forged by another person.
2.That the offender knew of the counterfeiting or
forgery.
3. That he used the counterfeit seal or forged
signature or stamp.

Counterfeiting coins
What are the crimes under counterfeiting coins?
They are:
1. Making and importing and uttering false
coins (Art. 163);
2. Mutilation of coins – importation and
utterance of mutilated coins (Art. 164); and
3. Selling of false or mutilated coin, without
connivance. (Art. 165)

Art. 163. Making and importing and uttering

false coins. – Any person who makes, imports, or
utters false coins, in connivance with
counterfeiters or importers, shall suffer:
1. Prision mayor in its minimum and
medium periods and a fine not to exceed 10,000
pesos, if the counterfeited coin be silver coin of
the Philippines or coin of the Central Bank of the
75
Philippines of ten-centavo denomination or
above.
2. Prision correccional in its minimum and
medium periods and a fine not to exceed 2,000
pesos if the counterfeited coins be any of the
minor coinage of the Philippines or of the Central
Bank of the Philippines below ten-centavo
denomination.
3. Prision correccional in its minimum
periods and a fine not to exceed 1,000 pesos, if the
counterfeited coin be currency of a foreign
country. (As amended by R.A. No. 4202, approved
on June 19, 1965)

Elements:
1. That there be false or counterfeited coins.
2. That the offender either made, imported or
uttered such coins.
3. That in case of uttering such false or
counterfeited coins, he connived with the
counterfeiters or importers.
Coin, defined
Coin is a piece of metal stamped with certain
marks and made current at a certain value.
(Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 519)
When is a coin false or counterfeited?
A coin is false or counterfeited, if it is forged or
if it is not authorized by the Government as legal
tender, regardless of its intrinsic value.
Counterfeiting means the imitation of a legal or
genuine coin. It may contain more silver than the
ordinary coin.
76
 There is counterfeiting when a spurious coin is
made. There must be an imitation of the peculiar
design of a genuine coin. (U.S. v. Basco, 6 Phil.
110)

Art. 164. Mutilation of coins – Importation

and utterance of mutilated coins. – The penalty of
prision correccional in its minimum period and a
fine not to exceed 2,000 pesos shall be imposed
upon any person who shall mutilate coins of the
legal currency of the (United States or of the)
Philippine Islands or import or utter mutilated
current coins, in connivance with the mutilator or
importer.

Acts punished under Article 164:

1. Mutilating coins of the legal currency, with the
further requirement that there be intent to damage or
to defraud another.
2. Importing or uttering such mutilated coins, with
the Turner requirement that there must be
connivance with the mutilator importer in case of
uttering.
Meaning of mutilation.
Mutilation means to take off part of the metal
either by filing it or substituting it for another metal
of inferior quality.
Mutilation is to diminish by ingenuous means
the metal in the coin. One who mutilates a coin does
not do so for the sake of mutilating, but to take
advantage of the metal abstracted; he appropriates a
part of the metal of the coin. Hence, the coin
diminishes in intrinsic value. One who utters said
mutilated coin receives its legal value, much more
77
than its intrinsic value. (People v. Tin Ching Ting,
G.R. No. L-4620, January 30, 1952)
The coin must be of "legal tender" in mutilation.
A reading of the provisions under this chapter
will reveal that only in this article does the law
require "legal tender" as an element of the offense in
the case of mutilation. Note the phrases "coins of the
legal currency and "current coins” used in the law.
It is indispensable that the mutilated coin be of
legal tender. (People v. Tin Ching Ting, supra.)
Coins of foreign country not included.
The coin mutilated must be genuine and has not
been withdrawn from circulation. The coin must be
of the legal currency or current coins of the
Philippines. Therefore, if the coin mutilated is legal
tender of a foreign country, it is not a crime of
mutilation under the Revised Penal Code.

Art. 169. How forgery is committed. – The

forgery referred to in this section may be
committed by any of the following means:
1. By giving to a treasury or bank note or
any instrument payable to bearer or to order
mentioned therein, the appearance of a true
and genuine document.
2. By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting,
or altering by any means the figures, letters,
words, or sign contained therein.

Forgery includes falsification and counterfeiting.

With the definition given in this article, the
crime of counterfeiting or forging treasury or bank
notes or other documents payable to bearer or to
78
order includes (1) acts of counterfeiting or forging
said instruments, and (2) acts of falsification.
(Guevara)
Section Four. –Falsification of legislative, public,
commercial, and private documents,
and wireless, telegraph, and
telephone messages

Five classes of falsification:

1. Falsification of legislative documents. (Art. 170)
2. Falsification of a document by a public officer,
employee or notary public. (Art. 171)
3. Falsification of a public or official, or
commercial document by a private individual. (Art.
172, par. 1)
4. Falsification of a private document by any
person. (Art. 172, par. 2)
5. Falsification of wireless, telegraph and
telephone messages. (Art. 173)
Forgery and falsification, distinguished.
The term forgery as used in Article 169 refers to
the falsification and counterfeiting of treasury or
bank notes or any instruments payable to bearer or to
order. Falsification is the commission of any of the
eight acts mentioned in Article 171 on legislative
(only the act of making alteration), public or official,
commercial, or private documents, or wireless, or
telegraph messages. (See Title Four, Chapter One,
Section Four.)
Forging and falsification are crimes under
Forgeries. (See Title Four, Chapter One.)

79
 Art. 171. Falsification by public officer,
employee or notary or ecclesiastical minister. – The
penalty of prision mayor and a fine not to exceed
5,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any public
officer, employee, or notary who, taking
advantage of his official position, shall falsify a
document by committing any of the following
acts:
1. Counterfeiting or imitating any
handwriting, signature, or rubric;
2. Causing it to appear that persons have
participated in any act or proceeding when
they did not in fact so participate;
3. Attributing to persons who have
participated in an act or proceeding
statements other than those in fact made by
them;
4. Making untruthful statements in a
narration of facts;
5. Altering true dates;
6. Making any alteration or intercalation in
a genuine document which changes its
meaning;
7. Issuing in an authenticated form a
document purporting to be a copy of an
original document when no such original
exists, or including in such copy a statement
contrary to, or different from, that of the
genuine original; or
8. Intercalating any instrument or note
relative to the issuance thereof in a protocol,
registry, or official book.
80
 The same penalty shall be imposed upon any
ecclesiastical minister who shall commit any
of the offenses enumerated in the preceding
paragraphs of this article, with respect to any
record or document of such character that its
falsification may affect the civil status of
persons.

Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer, employee,
or notary public.
2. That he takes advantage of his official position.
3. That he falsifies a document by committing any
of the following acts:
a. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting,
signature or rubric.
b. Causing it to appear that persons have
participated in any act or proceeding
when they did not in fact so participate.
c. Attributing to persons who have participated
in an act or proceeding statements other
than those in fact made by them.
d. Making untruthful statements in a narration
of facts.
e. Altering true dates.
f. Making any alteration or intercalation in a
genuine document which changes its
meaning.
g. Issuing in authenticated form a document
purporting to be a copy of an original
document when no such original exists, or including

81
in such copy a statement contrary to, or
different from, that of the genuine
original.
h. Intercalating any instrument or note relative
to the issuance thereof in a protocol,
registry or official book.
4. In case the offender is an ecclesiastical minister,
the act of falsification is committed with respect
to any record or document of such character that its
falsification may affect the civil status of persons.
Definition of document.
A document is any written statement by which a
right is established obligation extinguished. (People
v. Moreno, C.A., 38 O.G. 119)
A document is a writing or instrument by which
a fact may be proven and affirmed.
Thus, if the payroll is merely a draft, because it
has not been approved by the proper authority, it can
prove nothing and affirm nothing. (People v.
Camacho, 44 Phil. 488)
The pamphlets cannot be said to evidence a fact,
agreement or disposition. They are rather
merchandise as any other article usually sent by
C.O.D. mail. (People v. Agnis, 47 Phil. 945)
The document must be complete or at least it
must have the appearance of a true and genuine
document.
The document must be of apparent legal
efficacy. Thus, making a writing which is invalid on
its face, as in the case of a will not signed by the
requisite number of witnesses, is not falsification.
(Miller on Criminal Law, 406)
82
 Art. 172. Falsification by private individuals
and use of falsified documents. – The penalty of
prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods and a fine of not more than 5,000 pesos
shall be imposed upon:
1. Any private individual who shall commit
any of the falsifications enumerated in the
next preceding article in any public or official
document or letter of exchange or any other
kind of commercial document; and
2. Any person who, to the damage of a third
party, or with the intent to cause such
damage, shall in any private document
commit any of the acts of falsification
enumerated in the next preceding article.
Any person who shall knowingly introduce in
evidence in any judicial proceeding or to the
damage of another or who, with the intent to
cause such damage, shall use any of the false
documents embraced in the next preceding
article or in any of the foregoing subdivisions
of this article, shall be punished by the
penalty next lower in degree.

Three acts punished under Article 172.

They are:
1. Falsification of public, official or commercial
document by a private individual. (Paragraph No.
1)
2. Falsification of private document by any person.
(Paragraph No. 2)
83
3. Use of falsified document. (Last paragraph)
Falsification under paragraph 1 of Article 172.
Elements of falsification of public, official, or
commercial document by a private individual:
1. That the offender is a private individual or a
public officer or employee who did not take
advantage of his official position.
2. That he committed any of the acts of
falsification enumerated in Article 171.
3. That the falsification was committed in a public
or official or commercial document.
Four kinds of document:
(1) Public document – a document created, executed
or issued by a public official in response to the
exigencies of the public service, or in the
execution of which a public official intervened.
(U.S. v. Asensi, 34 Phil. 765)
A public document is any instrument
authorized by a notary public or a competent public
official, with the solemnities required by law.
(Cacnio, et al. v. Baens, 5 Phil. 742)
(2) Official document – a document which is issued
by a public official in the exercise of the functions
of his office. An official document is also a public
document. It falls within the larger class called
public documents. (U.S. v. Asensi, supra.)
(3) Private document – a deed or instrument
executed by a private person without the
intervention of a notary public or other person
legally authorized, by which document some
disposition or agreement is proved, evidenced or set
forth. (U.S. v. Orera, 11 Phil. 596)
84
 A theater ticket is a private document,
because it evidences an agreement for the rent of a
place in the theater to enable a possessor to witness
a theatrical performance. (U.S. v. Orera, supra.)
(4) Commercial document – any document defined
and regulated by the Code of Commerce (People
v. Co Beng, C.A., 40 O.G. 1913) or any other
commercial law.
Commercial documents are documents or
instruments used by merchants or businessmen
to promote or facilitate trade. (People v. Lizares,
C.A., 65 O.G. 7174, citing 2 Viada Codigo
Penal, 419-420)
Examples of commercial documents:
(a) Letters of exchange, letters of credit, drafts,
trade acceptances, checks, notes or pagares
issued in the course of a business
transaction, quedans, bonds, books of accounts,
and in general, any negotiable instrument.
(People v. Francisco, 10 C.A. Rep. 341, citing
Viada, 2 Cod. Pen. 419-420)
(b) Quedans or warehouse receipts. (People v.
Cu Unjieng, 61 Phil. 236)
(c) Cash files, deposit slips and bank
statements. (People v. Benito, 57 Phil.
587)
(d) Surety account, journal books, ledgers.
(People v. Lerma, 44 Phil. 471)
(e) Air way bills. These are in the nature of bills
of lading.

85
Art. 174. False medical certificates, false
certificates of merit or service, etc. – The penalties
of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period and a fine not
to exceed 1,000 pesos shall be imposed upon:
1. Any physician or surgeon who, in
connection with the practice of his profession,
shall issue a false certificate; and
2. Any public officer who shall issue a false
certificate of merit or service, good conduct,
or similar circumstances.
The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed
upon any private person who shall falsify a
certificate falling within the classes mentioned
in the two preceding subdivisions.

Certificate, defined.
A certificate is any writing by which testimony
is given that a fact has or has not taken place.
(Bouvier's Law Dictionary, p. 442)
Persons liable for falsification of certificates.
1. Physician or surgeon who, in connection with
the practice of his profession, issued a false
certificate. (It must refer to the illness or injury of a
person)
Note: The crime is False Medical Certificate
Note by a physician.
2. Public officer who issued a false certificate of
merit or service, good conduct or similar
circumstances.

86
 Note: The crime is False Certificate of Merit
or Service by a public officer.
3. Private individual who falsified a certificate
falling in the classes mentioned in Nos. 1 and
2.
Art. 175. Using false certificates. – The
penalty of arresto menor shall be imposed upon
any one who shall knowingly use any of the false
certificates mentioned in the next preceding
article.

Elements:
1. That a physician or surgeon had issued a false
medical certificate, or a public officer had issued a
false certificate of merit or service, good
conduct, or similar circumstances, or a private
person had falsified any of said certificates.
2. That the offender knew that the certificate was
false.
3. That he used the same.
When any of the false certificates mentioned in
Article 174 is used in the judicial proceeding, Article
172 does not apply, because the use of false
document in judicial proceeding under Article 172 is
limited to those false documents embraced in Article
171 and 172.

OTHER FALSITIES

87
Section One. — Usurpation of authority, rank,
title, and improper use of
names, uniforms, and insignia

Art. 177. Usurpation of authority or official

functions. – Any person who shall knowingly and
falsely represent himself to be an officer, agent,
or representative of any department or agency of
the Philippine Government or of any foreign
government, or who, under pretense of official
position, shall perform any act pertaining to any
person in authority or public officer of the
Philippine Government or of any foreign
government, or any agency thereof, without being
lawfully entitled to do so, shall suffer the penalty
of prision correccional in its minimum and
medium periods. (As amended by R.A. No. 379)

Two offenses are contemplated in Article 177.

Two offenses are contemplated in Article 177 –
usurpation of authority, covered by the first portion
thereof; and usurpation of official functions,
covered by the second portion. (People v.
Belarmino, C.A., 58 O.G. 6284)
Two ways of committing the crime under Article
177:
1. By knowingly and falsely representing oneself
to be an officer, agent or representative of any
department or agency of the Philippine Government
or any foreign government.
Note that in usurpation of authority, the
mere act of knowingly and falsely representing
88
oneself to be an officer, etc. is sufficient. It is not
necessary that he performs an act pertaining to a
public officer.
2. By performing any act pertaining to any person
in authority or public officer of the Philippine
Government or of a foreign government or any
agency thereof, under pretense of official position,
and without being lawfully entitled to do so.
Note that in usurpation of official functions,
it is essential that the offender should have
performed an act pertaining to a person in authority
or public officer, in addition to other
requirements.

Note:
1.The offender (1) should have represented
himself to be an officer, agent or
representative of any department or agency
of the government; or (2) should have
performed an act pertaining to a person in
authority or public officer.
2.False representation may be shown by acts.

Art. 178. Using fictitious name and concealing

true name. – The penalty of arresto mayor and a
fine not to exceed 500 pesos shall be imposed
upon any person who shall publicly use a
fictitious name for the purpose of concealing a
crime, evading the execution of a judgment, or
causing damage.

89
 Any person who conceals his true name and
other personal circumstances shall be punished
by arresto menor or a fine not to exceed 200 pesos.
(Restored by E.O. No. 187.)

I. Elements (using fictitious name):

1. That the offender uses a name other than his
real name.
2. That he uses that fictitious name publicly.
3. That the purpose of the offender is -
a. to conceal a crime;
b. to evade the execution of a judgment; or
c. to cause damage to public interest.
What is a fictitious name?
Any other name which a person publicly applies
to himself without authority of law is a fictitious
name. (U.S. v. To Lee Piu, 35 Phil. 4)
Causing damage must be to public interest.
If the purpose is for causing damage, it must be
damage to public interest. If it is damage to private
interest, the crime will be estafa under Article 315,
subdivision 2, par. (a).
Signing fictitious name in an application for
passport is publicly using such fictitious name.
The signing of a fictitious name, i.e., Toribio
Jalijali, instead of To Lee Piu, in an application for
passport, is publicly using a fictitious name. (U.S. v.
To Lee Piu, 35 Phil. 4)
To evade the execution of judgment or to conceal
a crime.

90
 Where a person takes the place of another who
has been convicted by final judgment, he is guilty of
using a fictitious name punishable under Article 178,
and not of evasion of the service of the sentence,
because the real convict alone is guilty thereof.
(Albert)
It seems that such person is also liable for
delivering prisoners from jail under Article 156, by
helping the escape of the real convict by other
means.
The prisoner who is replaced must necessarily
use the name of another, and in this case he is also
guilty of using a fictitious name to evade the
execution of the judgment against him. And the one
who takes his place has to use a fictitious name to
conceal the crime of delivering a prisoner from jail.

II. Elements (concealing true name):

1. That the offender conceals –
a. his true name; and
b. all other personal circumstances.
2. That the purpose is only to conceal his
identity.
Distinction between use of fictitious name and
concealing true name.
(a) In use of fictitious name, the element of
publicity must be present; in concealing true
name and other personal circumstances, that element
is not necessary.
(b) The purpose in use of fictitious name is any of
those three enumerated (to conceal a crime, to

91
evade the execution of a judgment, or to cause
damage); in concealing true name it is merely to
conceal identity.

Art. 179. Illegal use of uniforms or insignia. –

The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed
upon any person who shall publicly and
improperly make use of insignia, uniforms, or
dress pertaining to an office not held by such
person or to class of persons of which he is not a
member.

Elements:
1. That the offender makes use of insignia,
uniform or dress.
2. That the insignia, uniform or dress pertains to an
office not held by the offender or to a class of
persons of which he is not a member.
3. That said insignia, uniform or dress is used
publicly and improperly.

Section Two. – False testimony

False testimony, defined.
False testimony is committed by a person who,
being under oath and required to testify as to the
truth of a certain matter at a hearing before a
competent authority, shall deny the truth or say
something contrary to it.
What are the three forms of false testimony?
1. False testimony in criminal cases. (Arts. 180
and 181)
92
 2. False testimony in civil cases. (Art. 182)
3. False testimony in other cases. (Art. 183)
Nature of the crime of false testimony.
Falsehood is ever reprehensible; but it is
particularly odious when committed in judicial
proceedings, as it constitutes an imposition upon the
court and seriously exposes it to a miscarriage of
justice. (People v. Reyes, C.A., 48 O.G. 1837)

Art. 180. False testimony against a defendant.

– Any person who shall give false testimony
against the defendant in any criminal case shall
suffer:
1. The penalty of reclusion temporal, if the
defendant in said case shall have been sentenced
to death;
2. The penalty of prision mayor, if the
defendant shall have been sentenced to reclusion
temporal or perpetua;
3. The penalty of prision correccional, if the
defendant shall have been sentenced to any other
afflictive penalty; and
4. The penalty of arresto mayor, if the
defendant shall have been sentenced to a
correctional penalty or a fine, or shall have been
acquitted.
In cases provided in subdivisions 3 and 4 of
this article the offender shall further suffer a fine
not to exceed 1,000 pesos.

Elements:

93
1. That there be a criminal proceeding.
2. That the offender testifies falsely under oath
against the defendant therein.
3. That the offender who gives false testimony
knows that it is false.
4. That the defendant against whom the false
testimony is given is either acquitted or convicted
in a final judgment. (People v. Maneja, 72 Phil. 256)
The witness who gave false testimony is liable
even if his testimony was not considered by the
court.
Reason: Since the law punishes the false witness
even if the defendant in the principal case is
acquitted, it would seem that the law intends to
punish the mere giving of false testimony.

Art. 181. False testimony favorable to the

defendant. – Any person who shall give false
testimony in favor of the defendant in a criminal
case, shall suffer the penalties of arresto mayor in
its maximum period to prision correccional in its
minimum period and a fine not to exceed 1.000
pesos, if the prosecution is for a felony punishable
by an afflictive penalty, and the penalty of arresto
mayor in any other case.

False testimony favorable to the defendant is

equally repugnant to the orderly administration
of justice.
While false testimony in favor of an accused
may be less obnoxious than false testimony against
him, both forms of false testimony are equally
94
repugnant to the orderly administration of justice,
and deserve to be rigorously repressed. (People v.
Reyes, C.A., 48 O.G. 1837)
Reason for punishing the crime of false
testimony.
False testimony is punished not because of the
effect it actually produces, but because of its
tendency to favor or to prejudice the defendant.
(December Sup. Ct. of Spain, January 4, 1904)
False testimony by negative statement is in favor
of defendant.
A witness who falsely testified that he neither
saw nor was present at the killing of the deceased, is
guilty of false testimony because by not testifying
for the prosecution, he favored the accused.
(December Supreme Court of Spain, April 2, 1883)

Two ways of committing perjury.

They are:
1. By falsely testifying under oath; and
2. By making a false affidavit.
Note: Falsely testifying under oath
should not be in a judicial proceeding.
Elements of perjury:
1. That the accused made a statement under oath or
executed an affidavit upon a material matter;
2. That the statement or affidavit was made before
a competent officer, authorized to receive and
administer oath;

95
3. That in that statement or affidavit, the accused
made a willful and deliberate assertion of a
falsehood; and
4. That the sworn statement or affidavit containing
the falsity is required by law. (People v.
Bautista, C.A., 40 O.G. 2491)
What is an oath?
Any form of attestation by which a person
signifies that he is bound in conscience to perform
an act faithfully and truthfully. It involves the idea of
calling on God to witness what is averred as truth,
and it is supposed to be accompanied with an
invocation of His vengeance, or a renunciation of
His favor, in the event of falsehood. (39 Am. Jur.,
494)
Meaning of affidavit.
An affidavit is a sworn statement in writing; a
declaration in writing, made upon oath before an
authorized magistrate or officer.
Statement under oath - as the basis of the charge
of perjury.
B made a statement falsely charging O with
estafa, that is, that the latter borrowed from him an
English manuscript entitled “Manual of Exercises on
Correcting Everyday Errors," and that when he
demanded its return, O denied having received it. B
made it under oath in the preliminary investigation
before the Justice of the Peace, a competent officer
authorized to administer oath. B's statement
constitutes a material matter and is a deliberate
falsehood, because O never borrowed the
manuscript.
96
 Held: B is guilty of perjury. (People v. Bautista,
C.A., 40 O.G. 2491)
False affidavit - as the basis of the charge of
perjury.
The accused Rufo B. Cruz filled up a blank
application (Civil Service Form No. 2) for the
patrolman examination. He stated therein that he had
never been accused, indicted or tried for violation of
any law, ordinance or regulation before any court,
when in truth and in fact, as the accused well knew,
he had been prosecuted and tried before the Justice
of the Peace Court of Cainta, Rizal, for different
crimes. The application was signed and sworn to by
him before the municipal mayor of Cainta, Rizal.
Held: The crime committed is perjury. The
offense as defined in Article 183 of the Revised
Penal Code is the willful and corrupt assertion of a
falsehood under oath or affirmation administered by
authority of law on a material matter. (People v.
Cruz, 108 Phil. 255)
A false affidavit to a criminal complaint may give
rise to perjury.
The lower court had the opinion that an affidavit
to a criminal complaint has an entirely different
status from an affidavit for other purposes. In the
case of People v. Rivera (59 Phil. 236), it was held
that the false affidavit was not a violation of Article
363 of the Revised Penal Code but it was not held
that it would not violate Article 183 of said Code.
(People v. Cabero, 61 Phil. 121)
Material matter, defined.

97
 It is the main fact which is the subject of the
inquiry or any circumstance which tends to prove
that fact, or any fact or circumstance which tends to
corroborate or strengthen the testimony relative to
the subject of inquiry, or which legitimately affects
the credit of any witness who testifies. (U.S. v.
Estraña, 16 Phil. 520)
Example of material matter.
In the case of People v. Bautista, supra., the
material matter, that is, the main fact which was the
subject of the inquiry by the Justice of the Peace,
was whether the offended party borrowed the
English manuscript. The testimony of the accused
that the offended party borrowed it from him was
upon that material matter. if it was not true, the
complaint for estafa would be dropped by the justice
of the peace.

Art. 184. Offering false testimony in evidence.

– Any person who shall knowingly offer in
evidence a false witness or testimony in any
judicial or official proceeding, shall be punished
as guilty of false testimony and shall suffer the
respective penalties provided in this Section.

Elements of offering false testimony in evidence:

1. That the offender offered in evidence a false
witness or false testimony.
2. That he knew the witness or the testimony was
false.
3. That the offer was made in a judicial or official
proceeding.
98
 CRIMES AGAINST PERSON

DESTRUCTION OF LIFE

Art. 246. Parricide. – Any person who shall

kill his father, mother, or child, whether
legitimate or illegitimate, or any of his
ascendants, or descendants, or his spouse, shall
be guilty of parricide and shall be punished by
the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death. (As
amended by R.A. No. 7659)

Elements:
1. That a person is killed.
2. That the deceased is killed by the accused.
3. That the deceased is the father, mother, or child,
whether legitimate or illegitimate, or a legitimate
other ascendant or other descendant, or the
legitimate spouse, of the accused.

Essential element of parricide.

Relationship of the offender with the victim is
the essential element of this crime.
Parents and children are not included in the term
"ascendants" or "descendants."
The ascendants and descendants referred to in
this article exclude parents and children.
The law should read "or any other ascendant or
descendant.” This is correct translation from the
Spanish text of Article 246.
The other ascendant or descendant must be
legitimate.
99
 He who kills an illegitimate grandfather or an
illegitimate grandson is not guilty of parricide, but of
simple homicide or murder as the case may be.
A is the natural son of B. C is the legitimate
father of B. A killed C. Is A guilty of parricide? No.
C is an illegitimate grandfather of A. The crime
committed is only homicide.
The term “illegitimate” embraces all children
born out of wedlock. Thus, (a) adulterine, (b)
incestuous, and (c) sacrilegious children are included
under the term “illegitimate.”

The father, mother or child may be legitimate or

illegitimate.
The law is clear on this point. It says: “any
person who shall kill his father, mother, or child,
whether legitimate or illegitimate, x x x shall be
guilty of parricide x x x.”
If the deceased is either the father, mother or the
child, of the accused, proof of legitimacy is not
required. (People v. Embalido, 58 Phil. 154)

The child should not be less than three days old.

If the child killed by his parent is less than three
(3) days old, the crime is infanticide. (Art. 255)
Only relatives by blood and in the direct line,
except the spouse, are considered in parricide.
Note that Article 246 mentions "father, mother
or child," the two being the ascendants of the latter
and the latter being the descendant of the former,
"whether legitimate or illegitimate.” Only relatives
by blood may be legitimate or illegitimate. On the
other hand, the “ascendants or descendants” must be
legitimate. They, too, must be relatives by blood.
100
 Therefore, an adoptive father or adopted son, or
father-in-law or son-in-law is not included in this
provision for parricide.

Art. 247. Death or physical injuries inflicted

under exceptional circumstances. – Any legally
married person who, having surprised his spouse
in the act of committing sexual intercourse with
another person, shall kill any of them or both of
them in the act or immediately thereafter, or
shall inflict upon them any serious physical
injury, shall suffer the penalty of destierro.
If he shall inflict upon them physical injuries
of any other kind, he shall be exempt from
punishment.
These rules shall be applicable, under the
same circumstances, to parents with respect to
their daughters under eighteen years of age, and
their seducer, while the daughters are living with
their parents.
Any person who shall promote or facilitate
the prostitution of his wife or daughter, or shall
otherwise have consented to the infidelity of the
other spouse shall not be entitled to the benefits
of this article.

Requisites for the application of Article 247:

1. That a legally married person or a parent
surprises his spouse or his daughter, the latter
under 18 years of age and living with him, in the act
of committing sexual intercourse with another
person.

101
2. That he or she kills any or both, of them or
inflicts upon any or both of them any serious
physical injury in the act or immediately thereafter.
3. That he has not promoted or facilitated the
prostitution of his wife or daughter, or that he or she
has not consented to the infidelity of the other
spouse.

The accused must be a legally married person.

Hence, a man who surprised his common-law
wife in the act of sexual intercourse with another
man and killed her or both of them in the act, is
entitled to the benefits of Article 247. The law
requires that he must be legally married.

The wife is entitled to the benefits of Article 247.

The wife who kills or inflicts serious physical
injuries on her husband and/or his concubine, under
the circumstances mentioned in Article 247, is
entitled to the benefits of said article. (People v.
Corazon Cortez, 59 Phil. 568)
The phrase "any legally married person" and the
word "spouse" include the wife.

Art. 248. Murder. – Any person who, not

falling within the provisions of Article 246, shall
kill another, shall be guilty of murder and shall
be punished by reclusion perpetua to death if
committed with any of the following attendant
circumstances:
1. With treachery, taking advantage of
superior strength, with the aid of armed men, or
employing means to weaken the defense, or of
means or persons to insure or afford impunity;
102
 2. In consideration of a price, reward, or
promise;
3. By means of inundation, fire, poison,
explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel,
derailment or assault upon railroad, fall of an
airship, by means of motor vehicles, or with the
use of any other means involving great waste and
ruin;
4. On occasion of any of the calamities
enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or of an
earthquake, eruption of a volcano, destructive
cyclone, epidemic, or other public calamity;
5. With evident premeditation;
6. With cruelty, by deliberately and
inhumanly augmenting the suffering of the
victim, or outraging or scoffing at his person or
corpse. (As amended by RA. No. 7659)

Murder, defined.
Murder is the unlawful killing of any person
which is not parricide or infanticide, provided that
any of the following circumstances is present:
1. With treachery, taking advantage of superior
strength, with the aid of armed men, or employing
means to weaken the defense, or of means or persons
to insure or afford impunity;
2. In consideration of a price, reward or promise;
3. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion,
shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment or
assault upon a railroad, fall of an airship, by means
of motor vehicles, or with the use of any other
means involving great waste and ruin;
4. On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated
in the preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake,
103
eruption of a volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic,
or any other public calamity;
5. With evident premeditation;
6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly
augmenting the suffering of the victim, or outraging
or scoffing at his person or corpse. (AS amended by
R.A. No. 7659)

Elements of murder:
1. That a person was killed.
2. That the accused killed him.
3. That the killing was attended by any of the
qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article
248.
4. The killing is not parricide or infanticide.

“Not falling within the provisions of Article 246."

Although Article 248 makes reference only to
Article 246, which defines and penalizes parricide, it
is understood that the person killed should not be
less than three days old; for, otherwise, the crime
would be infanticide defined and penalized by
Article 255.

"Shall kill another."

In murder, the victim must be killed to
consummate the crime. If the victim is not killed, it
is either attempted or frustrated murder.

The offender must have intent to kill to be liable

for murder committed by means of fire, or other
means enumerated in par. 3 of Article 248.
Killing a person by means of fire is murder, only
when there is actual design to kill on the part of the
104
offender. (U.S. v. Burns, 41 Phil. 418) This ruling is
applicable to all the other circumstances enumerated
in paragraph No. 3 of Article 248.

But killing a person with treachery is murder

even if there is no intent to kill.
If the defendant had not committed the assault in
a treacherous manner, he would nevertheless have
been guilty of homicide, although he did not intend
to kill the deceased; and since the defendant did
commit the crime with treachery, he is guilty of
murder, because of the voluntary presence of the
qualifying circumstance of treachery. (People v.
Cagoco, 58 Phil. 530) This ruling may be applicable
to all the other circumstances in pars. Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5
and 6 of Article 248.
Note: The ruling is based on Article 4, par. 1, of
the Code.

Art. 249. Homicide. – Any person who, not

falling within the provisions of Article 246, shall
kill another, without the attendance of any of the
circumstances enumerated in the next preceding
article, shall be deemed guilty of homicide and be
punished by reclusion temporal.

Homicide, defined.
Homicide is the unlawful killing of any person,
which is neither parricide, murder, nor infanticide.

Elements:
(1) That a person was killed;

105
(2) That the accused killed him without any
justifying circumstance;
(3) That the accused had the intention to kill, which
is presumed;
(4) That the killing was not attended by any of the
qualifying circumstances of murder, or by that of
parricide or infanticide.

"Shall kill another."

In homicide, the victim must be killed to
consummate the crime. If the victim is not killed, it
is either attempted or frustrated homicide.

Penalty when the victim of homicide is under 12

years of age.
The penalty for homicide shall be reclusion
perpetua when the victim is under 12 years of age.
(Sec. 10, R.A. No. 7610)

Intent to kill is conclusively presumed when

death resulted.
When death resulted, even if there is no intent to
kill, the crime is homicide, not merely physical
injuries, because with respect to crimes of personal
violence, the penal law looks particularly to the
material results following the unlawful act and holds
the aggressor responsible for all the consequences
thereof. (U.S. v. Gloria, 3 Phil. 333)

Evidence of intent to kill is important only in

attempted or frustrated homicide.
In attempted or frustrated homicide, the offender
must have the intent to kill the victim. If there is no

106
intent to kill on the part of the offender, he is liable
for physical injuries. (Arts. 263-266) only.
Usually, the intent to kill is shown by the kind of
weapon used by the offender and the parts of the
victim's body at which the weapon was aimed, as
shown by the wounds inflicted. Hence, when a
deadly weapon, like a bolo, is used to stab the victim
in the latter's abdomen, the intent to kill can be
presumed.

Exception:
But if the accused went to his wife, who was
living separately from him, to entreat her to live with
him again, but a cousin of his wife provoked him
then and there and caused him to assault him (wife's
cousin) and her son by first marriage, with a bolo,
inflicting physical injuries, caused indiscriminately
and not deliberately, the purpose of the accused in
going to the house, and not the kind of weapon he
carried nor the parts of the bodies of the victims on
which the wounds were inflicted, is indicative and
determinative of his intention. The accused is liable
only for physical injuries. (People v. Penesa, 81
Phil. 398)
Note: The bolo which the accused carried with
him is one ordinarily used by farm laborers and the
accused was such a farm laborer.

Art. 250. Penalty for frustrated parricide,

murder, or homicide. – The courts, in view of the
facts of the case, may impose upon the person
guilty of the frustrated crime or parricide,
murder, or homicide, defined and penalized in
the preceding articles, a penalty lower by one
107
degree than that which should be imposed under
the provisions of Article 50.
The courts, considering the facts of the case,
may likewise reduce by one degree the penalty
which under Article 51 should be imposed for an
attempt to commit any of such crimes.

Courts may impose a penalty two degrees lower

for frustrated parricide, murder or homicide.
The court may impose a penalty lower by one
degree than that imposed under Article 50.
Article 50 provides that the penalty next lower
in degree than that prescribed by law for the
consummated felony shall be imposed upon the
principal in a frustrated felony.
Hence, the court can impose a penalty two
degrees lower, in view of the facts of the case.
This is permissive - not mandatory.

Courts may impose a penalty three degrees lower

for attempted parricide, murder or homicide.
The court may reduce by one degree the penalty
imposed under Article 51.
Article 51 provides that the penalty lower by
two degrees than that prescribed by law for the
consummated felony should be imposed upon the
principals in an attempt to commit a felony.
The court can, therefore, impose a penalty three
degrees lower in view of the facts of the case.

Illustrations:
Thus, where the defendant had good reason to be
jealous of his wife and attempted to kill her under
the influence of resulting passion, the accused may
108
be given the benefit of this article. (U.S. v.
Villanueva, 2 Phil. 62; U.S. v. Poblete, 10 Phil. 578)
In a case of frustrated murder, in view of the
nature of the wounds inflicted upon the injured party
which were cured in less than one month, the
accused may be given the benefit of a reduction of
the corresponding penalty. (U.S. v. Poblete, 10 Phil.
582)

An attempt on, or a conspiracy against, the life of

the Chief Executive, etc., is punishable by death.
Any person who shall attempt on, or conspire
against, the life of the Chief Executive of the
Republic of the Philippines, that of any member of
his family, or against the life of any member of his
cabinet or that of any member of the latter's family,
shall suffer the penalty of death. (Presidential Decree
No. 1110-A which took effect on March 29, 1977)
The reason for the heavier penalty for any
attempt on or conspiracy against the life of the Chief
Executive, etc., is that the prevailing circumstances
require that he and the other persons mentioned be
given ample protection against lawless elements who
may attempt on or conspire against their lives, and to
make it as a deterrent.

Art. 251. Death caused in a tumultuous affray.

– When, while several persons, not composing
groups organized for the common purpose of
assaulting and attacking each other reciprocally,
quarrel and assault each other in a confused
tumultuous manner, and in the course of the
affray someone is killed, and it cannot be
ascertained who actually killed the deceased, but
109
the person or persons who inflicted serious
physical injuries can be identified, such person
persons shall be punished by prision mayor.
If it cannot be determined who inflicted the
serious physical injuries on the deceased, the
penalty of prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods shall be imposed upon all those
who shall have used violence upon the person of
the victim.

Elements:
1. That there be several persons.
2. That they did not compose groups organized for
the common purpose of assaulting and attacking
each other reciprocally.
3. That these several persons quarreled and
assaulted one another in a confused and tumultuous
manner.
4. That someone was killed in the course of the
affray.
5. That it cannot be ascertained who actually killed
the deceased.
6. That the person or persons who inflicted serious
physical injuries or who used violence can be
identified.

Tumultuous affray exists when at least four

persons took part.
The word "several” (in the phrase "when, while
several persons”) in Article 251 means more than
two but not very many. The word "tumultuous” as
used in Article 153 means that the disturbance is
caused by more than three persons who are armed
or are provided with means of violence.
110
 Art. 252. Physical injuries inflicted in a
tumultuous affray. – When in a tumultuous affray
as referred to in the preceding article, only
serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the
participants thereof and the person responsible
therefor cannot be identified, all those who
appear to have used violence upon the person of
the offended party shall suffer the penalty next
lower in degree than that provided for the
physical injuries so inflicted.
When the physical injuries inflicted are of a
less serious nature and the person responsible
therefor cannot be identified, all those who
appear to have used any violence upon the person
of the offended party shall be punished by arresto
mayor from five to fifteen days.

Elements:
1. That there is a tumultuous affray as referred to in
the preceding article.
2. That a participant or some participants thereof
suffer serious physical injuries or physical injuries
of a less serious nature only.
3. That the person responsible therefor cannot be
identified.
4. That all those who appear to have used violence
upon the person of the offended party are known.

"When in a tumultuous affray x x x, only serious

physical injuries are inflicted."
When a person is killed in the course of the
affray, and the one who inflicted serious physical
injuries is known, Article 252 is not applicable to
111
those who used violence, because that article applies
when in a tumultuous affray, only serious physical
injuries or physical injuries of a less serious nature
are inflicted.

"Inflicted upon the participants thereof."

Unlike the victim in Article 251, the injured
party in the crime of physical injuries inflicted in a
tumultuous affray must be one or some of the
participants in the affray.

Penalty is one degree lower than that for the

physical injury inflicted.
Those who appear to have used violence upon
the person of the offended party shall suffer the
penalty next lower in degree than that provided for
the physical injuries so inflicted. (Art. 252, par. 1)

Only the one who used violence is liable.

Note that only those who used violence are
punished, because if the one who caused the
physical injuries is known, he will be liable for the
physical injuries actually committed (Arts. 263, 265
and 266), and not under this article.

Art. 253. Giving assistance to suicide. – Any

person who shall assist another to commit suicide
shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor, if such
person lends his assistance to another to the
extent of doing the killing himself, he shall suffer
the penalty of reclusion temporal. However, if the
suicide is not consummated, the penalty of arresto
mayor in its medium and maximum periods shall
be imposed.
112
Acts punishable as giving assistance to suicide.
1. By assisting another to commit suicide, whether
the suicide is consummated or not.
2. By lending his assistance to another to commit
suicide to the extent of doing the killing himself.

"If the suicide is not consummated."

The second sentence of Article 253 has
reference to the first way of giving assistance to
suicide, that is, only furnishing the person to commit
suicide the means with which to kill himself.
If the offender who lends his assistance performs
acts to do the killing himself, and the suicide is not
consummated, the penalty of arresto mayor in its
medium and maximum periods mentioned in the
second sentence of Article 253 should not be
imposed.
The penalty one or two degrees lower than that
provided for consummated suicide, where the
assistance of the offender consists in performing
acts to do the killing himself, should be imposed,
depending upon whether it is frustrated or it is
attempted suicide.

A person who attempts to commit suicide is not

criminally liable.
A person who attempts to commit suicide is not
criminally liable, because society has always
considered a person who attempts to kill himself as
an unfortunate being, a wretched person more
deserving of pity rather than of penalty.

113
Is a pregnant woman, who tried to commit
suicide by means of poison, but instead of dying,
the foetus in her womb was expelled, liable for
abortion?
No. In order to incur criminal liability for the
result not intended, one must be committing a
felony. (Art. 4, par. 1, R.P.C.) An attempt to commit
suicide is an act, but it is not punishable by law.
(Art. 3, R.P.C.) Article 253 does not penalize the
person who attempts to commit suicide. A woman
who tries to commit suicide is not committing a
felony. She is, therefore, not liable for abortion for
expelling the foetus instead.

Assistance to suicide is different from mercy-

killing.
Euthanasia – commonly known as mercy-
killing – is the practice of painlessly putting to death
a person suffering from some incurable disease.
Euthanasia is not lending assistance to suicide.
In euthanasia, the person killed does not want to die.
A doctor who resorts to mercy-killing of his patient
may be liable for murder. (Art. 248)

Art. 254. Discharge of firearms. – Any person

who shall shoot at another with any firearm shall
suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its
minimum and medium periods, unless the facts of
the case are such that the act can be held to
constitute frustrated or attempted parricide,
murder, homicide, or any other crime for which a
higher penalty is prescribed by any of the articles
of this Code.

114
Elements:
1. That the offender discharges a firearm against or
at another person.
2. That the offender has no intention to kill that
person.

"Shall shoot at another."

The act constituting the offense is shooting at
another with any firearm, without intent to kill him.
If the firearm is not discharged at a person, there is
no crime of discharge of firearm.

Discharge towards the house of victim is not

illegal discharge of firearm.
The mere assertion of the offended party that the
shot was directed at the place in his house where he
was, is not sufficient proof that the shot was aimed
or fired at him. It is essential for the prosecution to
prove in a positive way that the discharge of the
firearm was directed precisely against the offended
party. (People v. Cupin, C.A., 40 O.G., Supp. 11, 21)

Firing a gun against the house of the offended

party at random, not knowing in what part of the
house the people inside were, is only alarm under
Article 155.
The accused fired his gun at the door of the
kitchen, and at the wall of the house of the offended
party. He did not know in what part of the house the
people inside were.
Held: The acts committed by the accused
constituted a violation of Article 155, par. 1, for they
were intended to cause alarm in the place where the

115
shots were fired, producing danger to the persons in
the house. (People v. Hinolan, C.A., 47 0.G. 3596)

There must be no intention to kill.

If the discharge of the firearm at the offended
party is coupled with intent to kill him, the felony
should be classified as frustrated or attempted
parricide, murder or homicide, and not merely illegal
discharge of firearm. This is so, because Article 254
states, "unless the facts of the case are such that the
act can be held to constitute frustrated or attempted
parricide, murder or homicide.”
The purpose of the offender is only to intimidate
or frighten the offended party.
In discharge of firearm under Article 254, the
purpose of the offender is only to intimidate or to
frighten the offended party.

Intent to kill is negatived by distance of 200 yards

between offender and victim.
The distance of 200 meters was so great that it is
difficult to impute an intention on the part of the
offender to kill the offended party. The discharge
was intended merely to frighten away the offended
party. The crime is only discharge of firearm.
(People v. Agbuya, 57 Phil. 238)
But when there is intent to kill, because the
accused, not having contented himself with firing
once, fired successive shots at the offended party,
added to the circumstance that immediately before,
he had already killed a cousin of the offended party,
the crime committed is attempted homicide. (People
v. Kalalo, et al., 59 Phil. 715)

116
 Art. 255. Infanticide. – The penalty provided
for parricide in Article 246 and for murder in
Article 248 shall be imposed upon any person
who shall kill any child less than three days of
age.
If the crime penalized in this article be
committed by the mother of the child for the
purpose of concealing her dishonor, she shall
suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its medium
and maximum periods, and if said crime be
committed for the same purpose by the maternal
grandparents or either of them, the penalty shall
be reclusion temporal. (As amended by R.A. No.
7659)

Infanticide, defined.
Infanticide may be defined as the killing of any
child less than three days of age, whether the killer
is the parent or grandparent, any other relative of the
child, or a stranger.

Elements of infanticide.
1. That a child was killed.
2. That the deceased child was less than three days
(72 hours) of age.
3. That the accused killed the said child.

The penalty is that for parricide or murder, but

the name of the crime is always infanticide.
Article 225 does not provide a penalty for
infanticide. The penalty must be taken from Article
246 or from Article 248.

117
Father or mother or legitimate other ascendant
who kills a child less than three days old, to suffer
penalty for parricide.
If the father or mother or legitimate grandparent
kills the child less than three days old, the penalty is
that corresponding to parricide. (Art. 255)

Other person who kills a child less than three

days old, to suffer the penalty for murder.
If the offender is not so related to the child, the
penalty corresponding to murder shall be imposed.
(Art. 255)
Since the person who killed the child less than
three days old was the brother-in-law of its mother,
he incurred the penalty for murder. (People v. Jaca
and Rasalan, 55 Phil. 952)

Art. 256. Intentional abortion. – Any person

who shall intentionally cause an abortion shall
suffer:
1. The penalty of reclusion temporal, if he
shall use any violence upon the person of the
pregnant woman.
2. The penalty of prision mayor, if, without
using violence, he shall act without the consent of
the woman.
3. The penalty of prision correccional in its
medium and maximum periods, if the woman
shall have consented

Abortion, defined.
Carrara has defined abortion as the willful
killing of the foetus in the uterus, or the violent
118
expulsion of the foetus from the maternal womb
which results in the death of the foetus. (Guevara)

Foetus must die in consummated abortion.

If the foetus survives in spite of the attempt to
kill it or the use of violence, abortion is not
consummated. If abortion is intended and the foetus
does not die, it is frustrated intentional abortion
when all the acts of execution have been performed
by the offender.
If abortion is not intended and the foetus does
not die, in spite of the violence intentionally exerted,
the crime may be only physical injuries. There is no
frustrated unintentional abortion, in view of the lack
of intention to cause an abortion.

In abortion, the foetus may be over or less than

six months old.
Under the Revised Penal Code, abortion
ordinarily means the expulsion of the foetus before
the sixth month or before the term of its viability,
that is, capable of sustaining life.
But as long as the foetus dies as a result of the
violence used or the drugs administered, the crime of
abortion exists, even if the foetus is full term.
(Viada, Vol. V, p. 12, 5th ed.)

Ways of committing intentional abortion:

1. By using any violence upon the person of the
pregnant woman.
2. By acting, but without using violence, without
the consent of the woman. (By administering drugs
or beverages upon such pregnant woman without
her consent.)
119
3. By acting (by administering drugs or beverages),
with the consent of the pregnant woman.

Elements of intentional abortion:

a. That there is a pregnant woman;
b. That violence is exerted, or drugs or beverages
administered, or that the accused otherwise acts
upon such pregnant woman;
c. That as a result of the use of violence or drugs or
beverages upon her, or any other act of the accused,
the foetus dies, either in the womb or after having
been expelled therefrom;
d. That the abortion is intended.

Example of abortion by administering abortive.

A, believing that the child in the womb of a
woman was a sort of fish-demon, gave her a
"pocion” made of herbs. Two hours thereafter, she
gave birth to a child three months in advance of the
full period of gestation. (U.S. v. Boston, 12 Phil.
134)

Persons liable for intentional abortion.

The person who intentionally caused the
abortion is liable under Article 256. The woman is
liable under Article 258, if she consented to the
abortion caused on her. If she did not consent to the
abortion caused on her, she is not liable.
Abortion distinguished from infanticide.
A mother, who had aborted for taking "pociones
amargas,” buried near her house a living foetus. The
expelled foetus had already acquired a human form
and about six months old. But it did not have its own
life, independently of the mother. It could not subsist
120
by itself, outside the maternal womb. It did not unite
all the conditions for legal viability. A foetus under
these conditions had necessarily to succumb a few
moments after its expulsion from the maternal
womb.
Held: Abortion, not infanticide, was committed.
If the foetus (1) could sustain an independent life,
after its separation from the maternal womb, and it
(2) is killed the crime is infanticide. (See People v.
Detablan, C.A., 40 0.G., Supp. 5, 30)

Art. 257. Unintentional abortion. – The

penalty of prision correccional in its minimum
and medium periods shall be imposed upon any
person who shall cause an abortion by violence,
but unintentionally.

Elements:
1. That there is a pregnant woman.
2. That violence is used upon such pregnant
woman without intending an abortion.
3. That the violence is intentionally exerted.
4. That as a result of the violence the foetus dies,
either in the womb or after having been
expelled therefrom.

Unintentional abortion is committed only by

violence.
It should be noted that the law employs the word
"violence,” that is, actual physical force.
Thus, where a man points a gun at a pregnant
woman, at the same time telling her that he will kill
her, and because of the fright she absorbs, she
suffers an abortion, the offender is guilty of threats
121
only. (December Supreme Court of Spain of
November 30, 1887)

The violence must be intentionally exerted.

The accused who struck a woman three months
pregnant on her hip with a bottle, causing
hemorrhage and miscarriage was held guilty of
unintentional abortion. (U.S. v. Jeffrey, 15 Phil. 391)
Note that the violence consisting in striking the
pregnant woman with a bottle on the hip was
intentionally exerted by the accused.

Art. 258. Abortion practiced by the woman

herself or by her parents. – The penalty of prision
correccional in its medium and maximum periods
shall be imposed upon a woman who shall
practice an abortion upon herself or shall consent
that any other person should do so.
Any woman who shall commit this offense to
conceal her dishonor shall suffer the penalty of
prision correccional in its minimum and medium
periods.
If this crime be committed by the parents of
the pregnant woman or either of them, and they
act with the consent of said woman for the
purpose of concealing her dishonor, offenders
shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional its
medium and maximum periods.

Elements:
1. That there is a pregnant woman who has
suffered an abortion.
2. That the abortion is intended.
3. That the abortion is caused by –
122
 a. the pregnant woman herself;
b. any other person, with her consent; or
c. any of her parents, with her consent for the
purpose of concealing her dishonor.

The woman is liable if she "shall consent that any

other person should do so."
Note that the woman is liable under Article 258
either (1) when she shall practice an abortion upon
herself, or (2) when she shall consent that any other
person should do so.

Only the woman or any of her parents is liable

under Article 258, if the purpose of the latter is to
conceal her dishonor.
Note that Article 258 covers three cases,
namely:
1. Abortion committed by the woman upon
herself or by any other person with her
consent. (par. 1)
2. Abortion by the woman upon herself to
conceal her dishonor. (par. 2)
3. Abortion by any of the parents of the woman
with the latter's consent to conceal her
dishonor. (par. 3)
The person liable under paragraph 1 of Article
258 is the woman only. The other person who
caused the abortion on her with her consent is liable
under Article 256. If the purpose of the parents of
the woman was not to conceal her dishonor, the case
does not fall under Article 258, but under Article
256.

123
Liability of pregnant woman is mitigated if
purpose is to conceal dishonor.
If the purpose of the pregnant woman is to
conceal her dishonor, the penalty is lower. (Art. 258,
par. 2)
The reason for the mitigated responsibility is
that when a woman becomes pregnant out of an
illicit relationship, excited and obfuscated by the fear
of her dishonor being made public, she either
practices abortion upon herself or consents that any
other person does so, to erase the traces of her
mistake.

No mitigation for parents of pregnant woman

even if the purpose is to conceal dishonor.
If committed by any of the parents of the
pregnant woman and with the consent of such
woman to conceal her dishonor, the penalty is the
same as that for the woman who practiced abortion
upon herself without such purpose of concealing her
dishonor. (See paragraphs 1 and 3 of Art. 258)
There is no mitigation for the parents of the
pregnant woman, unlike in infanticide.

Art. 259. Abortion practiced by a physician or

midwife and dispensing of abortives. – The
penalties provided in Article 256 shall be imposed
in their maximum period, respectively, upon any
physician or midwife who, taking advantage of
their scientific knowledge or skill, shall cause an
abortion or assist in causing the same.
Any pharmacist who, without the proper
prescription from a physician, shall dispense any

124
abortive shall suffer arresto mayor and a fine not
exceeding 1,000 pesos.

Elements:
1. That there is a pregnant woman who has
suffered an abortion.
2. That the abortion is intended.
3. That the offender, who must be a physician or
midwife, causes, or assists in causing, the
abortion.
4. That said physician or midwife takes advantage
of his or her scientific knowledge or skill.

Penalty for intentional abortion is imposed in its

maximum period on physician or midwife.
The penalties provided for intentional abortion
(Art. 256) shall be imposed in the maximum period
upon the physician or midwife. (Art. 259)

Reason for the maximum penalty.

Physicians and midwives who cause or assist in
causing abortion are more severely punished because
they incur a heavier guilt in making use of their
knowledge for the destruction of human life, where
it should be used only for its preservation. (Albert)

As to the pharmacists, the elements are:

1. That the offender is a pharmacist.
2. That there is no proper prescription from a
physician.
3. That the offender dispenses any abortive.

Art. 260. Responsibility of participants in a

duel. – The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be
125
imposed upon any person who shall kill his
adversary in a duel.
If he shall inflict upon the latter physical
injuries only, he shall suffer the penalty provided
therefor, according to their nature.
In any other case, the combatants shall suffer
the penalty of arresto mayor, although no physical
injuries have been inflicted.
The seconds shall in all events be punished as
accomplices.

Duel, defined.
Duel is a formal or regular combat previously
concerted between two parties in the presence of two
or more seconds of lawful age on each side, who
make the selection of arms and fix all the other
conditions of the fight.

Acts punished in duel.

1. By killing one's adversary in a duel.
2. By inflicting upon such adversary physical
injuries.
3. By making a combat although no physical
injuries have been inflicted.

Who are liable in a duel?

1. The person who killed or inflicted physical
injuries upon his adversary, or both combatants in
any other case, as principals.
2. The seconds, as accomplices.

If death results, penalty is the same as that for

homicide.

126
 Note that the penalty for duel is reclusion
temporal, the same as that for homicide, if death
resulted.

PHYSICAL INJURIES

What are the crimes of physical injuries?

They are:
1. Mutilation. (Art. 262)
2. Serious physical injuries. (Art. 263)
3. Administering injurious substance or
beverages. (Art. 264)
4. Less serious physical injuries. (Art. 265)
5. Slight physical injuries and maltreatment.
(Art. 266)

Art. 262. Mutilation. – The penalty of

reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetual shall be
imposed upon any person who shall intentionally
mutilate another by depriving him, either totally
or partially, of some essential organ for
reproduction.
Any other intentional mutilation shall be
punished by prision mayor in its medium and
maximum periods.

Mutilation, defined.
The term "mutilation" means the lopping or the
clipping off of some part of the body.
The putting out of an eye does not fall under this
definition. Thus, when a robber stabbed a woman in
one eye, and as a result of the wound thus inflicted

127
she lost the use of the eye, there is no mutilation.
(U.S. v. Bogel, 7 Phil. 285)

Two kinds of mutilation:

1. By intentionally mutilating another by depriving
him, either totally or partially, of some essential
organ for reproduction.
2. By intentionally making other mutilation, that is,
by lopping clipping off any part of the body of the
offended party, other than essential organ for
reproduction, to deprive him of that part of body.

Elements of mutilation of the first kind:

1. That there be a castration, that is, mutilation of
organs necessary for generation, such as the
penis or ovarium.
2. That the mutilation is caused purposely and
deliberately, that is to deprive the offended party
of some essential organ for reproduction (Guevara)

Art. 263. Serious physical injuries. – Any

person who shall wound, beat, or assault another,
shall be guilty of the crime of serious physical
injuries and shall suffer:
1. The penalty of prision mayor, if in
consequence of the physical injuries inflicted, the
injured person shall become insane, imbecile,
impotent, or blind;
2. The penalty of prision correccional in its
medium and maximum periods, if in consequence
of the physical injuries inflicted, the person
injured shall have lost the use of speech or the
power to hear or to smell, or shall have lost an
eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a leg, or shall have
128
lost the use of any such member, or shall have
become incapacitated for the work in which he
was theretofore habitually engaged;
3. The penalty of prision correccional in its
minimum and medium periods, if in consequence
of the physical injuries inflicted, the person
injured shall have become deformed, or shall
have lost any other part of his body, shall have
lost the use thereof, or shall have been ill or
incapacitated for the performance of the work in
which he was habitually engaged for a period of
more than ninety days;
4. The penalty of arresto mayor in its
maximum period to prision correccional in its
minimum period, if the physical injuries inflicted
shall have caused the illness or incapacity for
labor of the injured person for more than thirty
days.
If the offense shall have been committed
against any of the persons enumerated in Article
246, or with attendance of any of the
circumstances mentioned in Article 248, the case
covered by subdivision number 1 of this article
shall be punished by reclusion temporal in its
medium and maximum periods, the case covered
by subdivision number 2 by prision correccional
in its maximum period to prision mayor in its
minimum periods the case covered by subdivision
number 3 by prision correccional in its medium
and maximum periods and the case covered by
subdivision number 4 by prision correccional in
its minimum and medium periods.
The provisions of the preceding paragraph
shall not be applicable to a parent who shall
129
inflict physical injuries upon his child by
excessive chastisement.

How is the crime of serious physical injuries

committed?
It is committed –
(1) by wounding;
(2) by beating; or
(3) by assaulting (Art. 263); or
(4) by administering injurious substance. (Art.
264)
The accused, while conversing with the offended
party, drew the latter's bolo from its scabbard. The
offended party caught hold of the edge of the blade
of his bolo and wounded himself.
Held: Since the accused did not wound, beat or
assault the offended party, he cannot be guilty of
serious physical injuries. (U.S. v. Villanueva, 31
Phil. 412)

May be committed by reckless imprudence, or by

simple imprudence or negligence.
A person may be guilty of lesiones by reckless
imprudence, or by simple imprudence or negligence
under Article 365 in relation to Article 263, when
due to lack of precaution he wounded another.

What are serious physical injuries?

They are:
1. When the injured person becomes insane,
imbecile, impotent or blind in consequence of
the physical injuries inflicted.
2. When the injured person (a) loses the use of
speech or the power to hear or to smell, or loses
130
an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a leg, or (b) loses
the use of any such member, or (c) becomes
incapacitated for the work in which he was
theretofore habitually engaged, in consequence of
the physical injuries inflicted.
3. When the person injured (a) becomes
deformed, or (b) loses any other member of his
body, or (c) loses the use thereof, or (d) becomes ill
or incapacitated for the performance of the
work in which he was habitually engaged for
more than 90 days, in consequence of the physical
injuries inflicted.
4. When the injured person becomes ill or
incapacitated for labor for more than 30
days (but must not be more than 90 days), as a result
of the physical injuries inflicted.

Classes of serious physical injuries.

Article 263 is divided into several paragraphs,
with specifications, in each case, of (1) the
consequences of the injuries inflicted, (2) the nature
and character of the wound inflicted, and (3) the
proper penalty. (U.S. v. Santos, 17 Phil. 87)
Physical injuries, distinguished from attempted
or frustrated homicide.
1. In both crimes, the offender inflicts physical
injuries. Attempted homicide may be committed,
even if no physical injuries are inflicted.
2. While in the crime of physical injuries, the
offender has no intent to kill the offended party, in
attempted or frustrated homicide, the offender has an
intent to kill the offended party.

131
PARAGRAPH 1: INJURED PERSON
BECOMES INSANE IMBECILE,
IMPOTENT OR BLIND

Meaning of the term "impotent."

In medical jurisprudence, impotence means
inability to copulate. Properly used of the male; but
it also has been used synonymously with "sterility.”
(Smith v. Smith, 206 Mo. App. 646, 229, S.W. 398;
Heinemann v. Heinemann, 118 Or. 178, 245, p.
1082, 1083, cited in Black's Law Dictionary, 4th
Ed., p. 889)
Since the effect is the same: loss of power to
procreate, the term impotent should include inability
to copulate and sterility.

Penalty when the victim of serious physical

injuries under paragraph 1 is under 12 years of
age.
The penalty for Article 262, paragraph 1 shall be
reclusion perpetua when the victim is under 12 years
of age. (Sec. 10, R.A. No. 7610)

Blindness and loss of an eye.

Under paragraph 1, the blindness must be of two
eyes.
Under paragraph 2, note the loss of an eye only.
According to Cuello Calon (II Codigo Penal,
10th Ed., pp. 515-516), the blindness must be
complete. Mere weakness of vision is not
contemplated.

PARAGRAPH 2: INJURED PERSON LOSES

USE OF SPEECH OR POWER TO
132
HEAR OR SMELL OR LOSEA AN EYE,
HAND, FOOT, ARM, OR LEG,
LOSES USE OF ANY SUCH MEMBER
BECOMES INCAPACITATED FOR
WORK WHICH HE WAS
HABITUALLY ENGAGED.

Loss of power to hear.

It must be loss of power to hear of both ears. If
there is loss of power to hear of one ear only, it is
serious physical injuries under paragraph 3 of
Article 263. (People v. Hernandez, 94 Phil. 49)

PARAGRAPH 3: INJURED PERSON

BECOMES DEFORMED OR LOSES ANY
OTHER MEMBER OF THE BODY, OR
THE USE THEREFOR. OR
BECOMES ILL OR
INCAPACITATED FOR THE
PERFORMACE OF THE WORK IN
WHICH HE WAS HABITUALLY
ENGAGED FOR MORE THAN 90
DAYS

Paragraph 3 covers any member which is not

principal member of the body.
The phrase "any other part of his body” in
paragraph 3 of this article should be “any other
member," meaning any member other than an eye, a
hand, a foot, an arm, or a leg, which are mentioned
in paragraph 2. (People v. Balubar, 60 Phil. 699)
The fingers of the hand are not principal
members. The loss of the use of three fingers of a
left hand is serious physical injuries under paragraph
133
3 of Article 263. But if it is alleged in the
information and proved that the loss of the use of the
three fingers also resulted in the loss of the use of
the hand itself, it is serious physical injuries under
paragraph 2 of said article. (U.S. v. Punsalan, 23
Phil. 375)

It is a serious physical injury when the offended

party becomes deformed.
Deformity, defined.
By deformity it is meant physical ugliness,
permanent and definite abnormality. It must be
conspicuous and visible.

Deformity requires that it be —

(a) physical ugliness,
(b) permanent and definite abnormality, and
(c) conspicuous and visible.
Note: If the scar is usually covered by the dress
or clothes, it would not be conspicuous and visible.
A scar produced by an injury on the upper part
of the neck, near the jaw, constitutes deformity
within the meaning of paragraph 3 of this article.

Loss of teeth as deformity.

The loss of three incisors is a visible deformity,
while the loss of incisor does not constitute
deformity according to the Supreme Court of Spain.
(Guevara)

Deformity by loss of teeth refers to injury which

cannot be repaired by the action of nature.
The accused struck the injured party in the
mouth with the iron instrument used for turning the
134
engine of a motor truck, causing the loss of four
front teeth.
The injury contemplated by the Code is an
injury that cannot be repaired by the action of nature.
The fact that the offended party may have artificial
teeth, if he has the necessary means and so desires,
does not repair the injury, although it may lessen the
disfigurement. The case of a child or an old man is
an exception to the rule. (People v. Balubar, 60 Phil.
699)

Loss of one tooth which impaired appearance is

deformity.
The crime committed falls under subdivision 3
of Article 263 in view of the uncontroverted loss of
Duremdes' left upper central incisor which loss was
visible and impaired his appearance, and which
disfigurement could not be removed by the action of
nature. (People v. Lagrosas, C.A., 61 O.G. 6519,
citing the case of People v. Balubar, 60 Phil. 698)
In an earlier case, it was held that the breakage
of an incisor does not constitute deformity. (People
v. Cambel, CA-G.R. No. 6054, November 28, 1940)

A front tooth is a member of the body.

A front tooth is a member of the body, other
than a principal member, within the meaning of the
words, "or shall have lost any other member," as
used in Subsection 3 of Article 263 of the Revised
Penal Code. (People v. Balubar, 60 Phil. 707)
Hence, the loss of a front tooth due to a fist blow
is serious physical injury under paragraph 3 of
Article 263.

135
Loss of both outer ears constitutes deformity and
also loss of the power to hear.
Since the loss of two ears caused the deafness of
the injured party, the defendants who cut off both
ears of the offended party are guilty of serious
Physical injuries. (U.S. v. Mañaul, et al., 4 Phil.
342)
Note: The loss of the outer ears will necessarily
cause deformity. If there is loss of power to hear of
both ears as a result of the loss of both outer ears, the
crime should be punished under par. 2 of Article
263.

Loss of the lobule of the ear is deformity.

The accused held the offended party by the hair,
dragged her along the ground, and then bit her left
ear.
Held: The offended party was permanently
disfigured because of the loss of the lobule of the left
ear. (U.S. v. Solis, et al., 4 Phil. 178)

Loss of index and middle fingers is either

deformity or loss of a member, not principal one,
of his body or use of same.
The accused struck with his bolo the offended
party, severing the index and middle fingers of his
right hand. The offended party was not rendered
incapable of working in the fields, his occupation,
with the loss of his said fingers.
Held: The offended party lost a member, not
principal one, of his body or the use of the same and
was also deformed. (U.S. v. Bugarin 1 Phil. 189)

136
Loss of power to hear of right ear only is loss of
use of other part of body.
Loss “of the power to hear" is surely a serious
physical injury. But is the loss “of the power to hear
of his right ear” a loss of the power to hear? As the
offended party may still hear through his left ear, it
would seem he has not lost the power to hear.
However, Article 263, paragraph 3, prescribes
prision correccional in its minimum and medium
periods if the person injured shall have lost "the use
of any other part of his body.” The offended party
was deprived of the use of his right ear, a part of his
body. (People v. Hernandez, 94 Phil. 49)

Illness as a consequence of physical injuries

inflicted.
The words “ill” and “illness” are used in
paragraphs Nos. 3 and 4, respectively, of Article
263. There is illness for a certain period of time,
when the wound inflicted did not heal within that
period. (People v. Penesa, 81 Phil. 403)
In a case, months after the offense occurred, the
injury to the offended party's left eye has not been
entirely cured. This is illness for more 30 days and
the case falls under paragraph 4 of Article 263.
(People Castro, G.R. No. 41606, April 29, 1935)
Note: It would seem that if the injury would
require medical attendance for more than 30 days,
the illness of the offended party may be considered
as lasting for more than 30 days. The fact that there
was medical attendance for that period of time
shows that the injuries were not cured for that length
of time.

137
Medical attendance is not important in serious
physica
It is to be noted that par. 4, Article 263, requires
illness or incapacity for labor, not medical
attendance. (People v. Obia, C.A., 45 0.G. 2568) In
other paragraphs of Article 263, medical attendance
is not also mentioned.

In determining incapacity, must the injured party

have an avocation at the time of the injury?
In paragraph 2 of this article, note that the
incapacity of the offended party refers to the work
“in which he was theretofore habitually engaged."
So also in paragraph 3, which speaks of
"incapacitated for the performance of the work in
which he was habitually engaged."
In these two paragraphs, at least, the offended
party must have an avocation or work at the time of
the injury.
The term "work” includes studies or preparation
for a profession.
Incapacity for a certain kind of work only, but
not for all, is a serious physical injury under par. 2 or
par. 3 of this article.
In the case of U.S. v. Bugarin, 16 Phil. 189, it is
said that the incapacity must show that the physical
injury has rendered the offended party incapable of
working in the fields which was the occupation in
which at the time he had been habitually engaged.
When the injured man did not recover so as to
be able to attend to his ordinary avocation for a
period of a little more than 30 days, the case falls
under Article 263, par. 4. (U.S. v. Sy Vinco, 5 Phil.
47)
138
PARAGRAPH 4: INJURED PERSON
BECOMES ILL OR
INCAPACITATED FOR LABOR
FOR MORE THAN 30 DAYS

Paragraph 4 speaks of incapacity for any kind of

labor.
The fourth paragraph of this article does not
refer to labor in which the offended party is engaged
at the time the serious physical injuries are inflicted.
Hence, the incapacity is for any kind of labor.

Ordinary physical injuries, distinguished from

mutilation.
The mutilation must have been caused
purposely and deliberately to lop or clip off some
part of the body so as to derive the offended party of
such part of the body; this special intention is not
present in the other kinds of physical injuries.

Qualified serious physical injuries.

If the offense is committed against any of the
persons enumerated the article defining the crime of
parricide (Art. 246) or with the attendance of any of
the circumstances mentioned in the article defining
the crime murder (Art. 248), the law provides higher
penalties. (Art. 263, paras next to the last)

Art. 264. Administering injurious substances

or beverages. – The penalties established by the
next preceding article shall be applicable in the
respective case to any person who, without intent
139
to kill, shall inflict upon another any serious
physical injury, by knowingly administering to
him any injurious substances or beverages or by
taking advantage of his weakness of mind or
credulity.

Elements:
1. That the offender inflicted upon another any
serious physical injury.
2. That it was done by knowingly administering to
him any injurious substances or beverages or by
taking advantage of his weakness of mind or
credulity.
3. That he had no intent to kill.

It is frustrated murder when there is intent to

kill.
If the offender had any intention to kill, the
crime would be frustrated murder, the injurious
substance to be considered as poison.

"By knowingly administering to him any

injurious substances."
If the accused did not know of the injurious
nature of the substances he administered, he is not
liable under this article.

Administering injurious substance means

introducing into the body the substance.
The infliction of injuries by throwing mordant
chemicals or poisons on the face or upon the body is
not contemplated in this article, because that is not
"administering" injurious substance or beverage.
(U.S. v. Chiong Songco, 18 Phil. 459)
140
 Art. 265. Less serious physical injuries. – Any
person who shall inflict upon another physical
injuries not described in the preceding articles,
but which shall incapacitate the offended party
for labor for ten days or more, or shall require
medical attendance for the same period, shall be
guilty of less serious physical injuries and shall
suffer the penalty of arresto mayor.
Whenever less serious physical injuries shall
have been inflicted with the manifest intent to
insult or offend the injured person, or under
circumstances adding ignominy to the offense, in
addition to the penalty of arresto mayor a fine not
exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed.
Any less serious physical injuries inflicted
upon the offender's parents, ascendants,
guardians, curators, teachers, or persons of rank,
or persons in authority, shall be punished by
prision correccional in its minimum and medium
periods, provided that, in the case of persons in
authority, the deed does not constitute the crime
of assault upon such persons.

Matters to be noted in the crime of less serious

physical injuries.
1. That the offended party is incapacitated for labor
for ten days or more (but not more than 30 days),
or needs medical attendance for the same period of
time.
2. That the physical injuries must not be those
described in the preceding articles.

141
 Thus, if the incapacity is more than 30 days or
the illness lasts more than 30 days, it is a serious
physical injury under paragraph 4 of Article 263.

Qualified less serious physical injuries.

(1) A fine not exceeding P500, in addition to
arresto mayor, shall be imposed for less serious
physical injuries when –
(a) there is a manifest intent to insult or offend
the injured person, or
(b) there are circumstances adding ignominy to
the offense.
(2) A higher penalty is imposed when the victim is
either –
(a) The offender's parents, ascendants,
guardians, curators or teachers; or
(b) Persons of rank or persons in authority,
provided the crime is not direct assault.

Medical attendance or incapacity is required in

less serious physical injuries.
The law includes two subdivisions, dealing with
(1) the inability for work, and (2) the necessity for
medical attendance. So that although the wound
required medical attendance for only two days; yet if
the injured party was prevented from attending to his
ordinary labor for a period of twenty-nine days, the
physical injuries are denominated less serious. (U.S.
v. Trinidad, 4 Phil. 152; People v. Olavides, C.A.,
40 O.G., Supp. 4, 8)

The crime is less serious physical injuries even if

there was no incapacity, but the medical
treatment was for 13 days.
142
 Her injury comes under the provisions of Article
265, inasmuch as she was treated for only 13 days,
and there is no evidence that she was given further
medical attendance, granting that it took more than
13 days for the fracture to heal. She was not
incapacitated for the performance of the work in
which she was habitually engaged. (People v.
Anastacio, C.A., 55 0.G. 5047)

Art. 266. Slight physical injuries and

maltreatment. – The crime of slight physical
injuries shall be punished:
1. By arresto menor when the offender has
inflicted physical injuries which shall incapacitate
the offended party for labor from one to nine
days, or shall require medical attendance during
the same period;
2. By arresto menor or a fine not exceeding
200 pesos and censure when the offender has
caused physical injuries which do not prevent the
offended party from engaging in his habitual
work nor require medical attendance;
3. By arresto menor in its minimum period
or a fine not exceeding 50 pesos when the
offender shall ill-treat another by deed without
causing any injury.

Three kinds of slight physical injuries:

1. Physical injuries which incapacitated the
offended party for labor from one (1) to nine (9)
days, or required medical attendance during the
same period.

143
2 Physical injuries which did not prevent the
offended party from engaging in his habitual work
or which did not require medical attendance.
3. Ill-treatment of another by deed without causing
any injury.

Some hours after nine days, not amounting to ten

days.
A physical injury which incapacitates the
offended party from working for 9 days and some
hours without amounting to 10 days, is a slight
physical injury.

Examples of physical injuries under paragraph 2.

Contusion on the face or black eye produced by
fistic blow.

Example of slight physical injury by ill-

treatment.
Any physical violence which does not produce
injury, such as slapping the face of the offended
party, without causing a dishonor.

RAPE

Art. 266-A. Rape, When and How Committed.

– Rape is committed –
1) By a man who shall have carnal
knowledge of a woman under any of the following
circumstances:
a) Through force, threat or intimidation;
b) When the offended party is deprived
of reason or is otherwise unconscious;
144
 c) By means of fraudulent machination
or grave abuse of authority;
d) When the offended party is under
twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even
though none of the circumstances mentioned
above be present;
2) By any person who, under any of the
circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof,
shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting
his penis into another person's mouth or anal
orifice, or any instrument or object, into the
genital or anal orifice of another person. (R.A.
No.8353 which took effect on October 22, 1997)

Art. 266-B. Penalties. – Rape under

paragraph 1 of the next preceding article shall be
punished by reclusion perpetua.
Whenever the rape is committed with the use
of a deadly weapon or by two or more persons,
the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death.
When by reason or on the occasion of the
rape, the victim has become insane, the penalty
shall be reclusion perpetua to death.
When the rape is attempted and a homicide is
committed by reason or on the occasion thereof,
the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death.
When by reason or on the occasion of the
rape, homicide is committed, the penalty shall be
death.
The death penalty shall also be imposed if the
crime of rape is committed with any of the
following aggravating/qualifying circumstances:

145
 1) When the victim is under eighteen (18)
years of age and the offender is a parent,
ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by
consanguinity or affinity within the third civil
degree, or the common law spouse of the parent
of the victim.
2) When the victim is under the custody of
the police or military authorities or any law
enforcement or penal institution.
3) When the rape is committed in full view
of the spouse, parent, any of the children or other
relatives within the third civil degree of
consanguinity.
4) When the victim is a religious engaged in
legitimate religious vocation or calling and is
personally known to be such by the offender
before or at the time of the commission of the
crime.
5) When the victim is a child below seven (7)
years old.
6) When the offender knows that he is
afflicted with Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus
(HIV)/Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
(AIDS) or any other sexually transmissible
disease and the virus or disease is transmitted to
the victim.
7) When committed by any member of the
Armed Forces of the Philippines or para-military
units thereof or the Philippine National Police or
any law enforcement agency or penal institution,
when the offender took advantage of his position
to facilitate the commission of the crime.

146
 8) When by reason or on the occasion of the
rape, the victim has suffered permanent physical
mutilation or disability.
9) When the offender knew of the pregnancy
of the offended party at the time of the
commission of the crime.
10) When the offender knew of the mental
disability emotional disorder and/or physical
handicap of the offended party at the time of the
commission of the crime.
Rape under paragraph 2 of the next
preceding article shall be punished by prision
mayor.
Whenever the rape is committed with the use
of a deadly weapon or by two or more persons,
the penalty shall be prision mayor to reclusion
temporal.
When by reason or on the occasion of the
rape, the victim has become insane, the penalty
shall be reclusion temporal.
When the rape is attempted and a homicide is
committed by reason or on the occasion thereof,
the penalty shall be reclusion temporal to
reclusion perpetua.
When by reason or on the occasion of the
rape, homicide is committed, the penalty shall be
reclusion perpetua.
Reclusion temporal shall also be imposed if
the rape is committed with any of the ten
aggravating/qualifying circumstances mentioned
in this article. (R.A. No. 8353)

Elements of rape under paragraph 1:

1. That the offender is a man;
147
2. That the offender had carnal knowledge of a
woman;
3. That such act is accomplished under any of the
following circumstances.
(a) By using force or intimidation; or
(b) When the woman is deprived of reason or
otherwise unconscious; or
(c) By means of fraudulent machination or
grave abuse of authority; or
(d) When the woman is under 12 years of age or
demented.

Elements of rape under paragraph 2:

1. That the offender commits an act of sexual
assault;
2. That the act of sexual assault is committed by
any of the following means:
(a) By inserting his penis into another person's
mouth or anal orifice; or
(b) By inserting any instrument or object into
the genital or anal orifice of another person;
3. That the act of sexual assault is accomplished
under any of the following circumstances:
(a) By using force or intimidation;
(b) When the woman is deprived of reason or
otherwise unconscious; or
(c) By means of fraudulent machination or
grave abuse of authority; or
(d) When the woman is under 12 years of age or
demented.

Who can commit rape?

Under Republic Act No. 8353, the crime of rape
can now be committed by a male or a female. Before
148
its amendment, rape could only be committed by a
male person.

PARAGRAPH 1: RAPE BY SEXUAL

INTERCOURSE
The contact of the male penis with the woman's
vagina is referred to as "rape by sexual
intercourse.” (People v. Soriano, 388 SCRA 140,
[2002]; People v. Palma, 148869-74, December 11,
2003)

A broken hymen is not an essential element of

rape.
A freshly broken hymen is not an essential
element of rape. Even the fact that the hymen of the
victim was still intact does not rule out the
possibility of rape. Research in medicine even points
out that negative findings are of no significance,
since the hymen may not be torn despite repeated
coitus. In any case, for rape to be consummated, full
penetration is not necessary. Penile invasion
necessarily entails contact with the labia. It suffices
that there is proof of the entrance of the male organ
into the labia of the pudendum of the female organ.
Penetration of the penis by entry into the lips of the
vagina, even without rupture or laceration of the
hymen, is enough to justify a conviction for rape.
(People v. Ortoa, G.R. No. 114707, February 23,
2009)
In People v. Gabayron (278 SCRA 78 [1997]),
the conviction of accused for rape was sustained
even though the victim's hymen remained intact after
the incidents because medical researches show that
negative findings of lacerations are of no
149
significance, as the hymen may not be torn despite
repeated coitus. It was noted that many cases of
pregnancy had been reported about women with
unruptured hymens, and that there could still be a
finding of rape even if, despite repeated intercourse
over a period of years, the victim still retained an
intact hymen without signs of injury.
In People v. Capt. Llanto (G.R. No. 146458,
January 20, 2003), citing People v. Aguinaldo (316
SCRA 819[1999]), the conviction of the accused for
rape was affirmed despite the absence of laceration
on the victim's hymen since medical findings
suggest that it is possible for the victim's hymen to
remain intact despite repeated sexual intercourse.
The Supreme Court elucidated that the strength and
dilatability of the hymen varies from one woman to
another, such that it may be so elastic as to stretch
without laceration during intercourse; on the other
hand, it may be so resistant that its surgical removal
is necessary before intercourse can ensue.

Exact date of sexual assault not an essential

element of rape.
In rape cases, the material fact or circumstance
to be considered is the occurrence of the rape, not
the time of its commission. The date or time the rape
was committed is not an essential ingredient as it is
the carnal through force and intimidation that is the
gravamen of the offense. It is, thus, sufficient that
the date of commission alleged is as near as possible
to the actual date. (People v. Ceredon, G.R. No.
167179. January 28, 2008, 542 SCRA 550, 571)
The exact date of the sexual assault is not an
essential element of the crime of rape; what should
150
control is the fact of the commission of the rape or
that there is proof of the penetration of the female
organ. (People v. Bunagan, G.R. No. 177161, June
30, 2008, 556 SCRA 808. 813)

Only one of the four circumstances mentioned in

paragraph 1 is sufficient.
Thus, when force or intimidation is employed by
the offender, it is not necessary that the woman be
unconscious when he had carnal knowledge of her.

PARAGRAPH 2: RAPE THROUGH SEXUAL

ASSAULT
The sexual abuse under paragraph 2 is
categorized as "rape through sexual assault.”
(People v. Soriano, 388 SCRA 140, [2002); People
v. Palma 148869-74, December 11, 2003)

BY USING FORCE AND INTIMIDATION

Degree of force necessary to constitute rape.
At first, the offended woman shouted for help,
struggled and kicked the accused, but the latter
pressed a hunting knife at her throat, overcame her
resistance, fondled her and after removing her
drawers, succeeded in having sexual intercourse
with her.
Held: A verbal refusal alone will not do. There
must be physical struggle, taxing her powers to the
utmost. Thus, mere initial resistance of the offended
party in rape cases is not the manifest and tenacious
resistance that the law requires. (People v. Lago,
C.A., 45 0.G. 1356)
Consent and not physical force is the common
origin of acts between man and woman. Strong
151
evidence and indications of great weight will alone
provide force and violence in rape. (U.S. v. De Dios,
8 Phil. 279, citing Pacheco)
When the accused girl stated that she defended
herself against the accused as long as she could, but
he overpowered her and held her till her strength
gave out, and then accomplished his vicious,
purpose, there is evidence of sufficient force.
(People v. Momo, 56 Phil. 86)
The force need not be irresistible. It need not be
present and so long as it brings the desired result, all
considerations of whether it was more or less
irresistible is beside the point. (People v. Momo,
supra.; People v. Jimenez, 93 Phil. 137)

Force employed against the victim of rape need

not be of such character as could be resisted.
It is not necessary that the force employed
against the complaining woman in rape be so great
or of such a character as could not be resisted. It is
enough that the force used is sufficient to
consummate the culprit's purpose of copulating with
the offended woman. The force or violence
necessary in rape is naturally a relative term,
depending on the age, size and strength of the parties
and their relation to each other. (People v.
Savellano, 57 SCRA 320)

Resistance when futile, does not amount to

consent.
It was held in People v. Las Piñas, Jr., G.R. No.
133444, February 20. 2002, citing People v. Dreu,
334 SCRA 62 (2000), that the test is whether the
threat or intimidation produces a reasonable fear in
152
the mind of the victim that if she resists or does not
yield to the desires of the accused, the threat would
be carried out. Where resistance would be futile,
offering none at all does not amount to consent to
the sexual assault. It is not necessary that the victim
should have resisted unto death or sustained physical
injuries in the hands of the rapist. It is enough if the
intercourse takes place against her will or if she
yields because of genuine apprehension of harm to
her if she did not do so. Indeed, the law does not
impose upon a rape victim the burden of proving
resistance. (People v. Sending, G.R. Nos. 141773-
76, January 20. 2003)

Intimidation.
Intimidation must be viewed in light of the
victim's perception and judgment at the time of rape
and not by any hard and fast rule. It is enough that it
produces fear – fear that if the victim does not yield
to the demands of the accused, something would
happen to her at the moment or thereafter, as when
she is threatened with death if she reports the
incident. (People v. Tabugoca, 285 SCRA 312, 332
[1998]; People v. Metin, GR 140781, May 8, 2003)

Rape committed by employing intimidation.

Rosalla was thirteen years, four months and
twenty days old at the time she was raped. She was
an immature teenager. She could easily be coerced
or cowed by a big old farmer and former security
guard like Garcines (his brother was a policeman).
Her case is not far removed from that on an eleven-
year-old girl with whom voluntary carnal intercourse
is considered rape. Intimidation includes the moral
153
kind such as the fear caused by threatening the girl
with a knife or pistol. (People v. Garcines, 57 SCRA
653, citing 2 Cuello Calon, Codigo Penal, 12 Ed.
537)

Moral Ascendancy or Influence, held to

substitute for the element of physical force or
intimidation.
In a number of cases, the Supreme Court has
ruled that the moral ascendancy or influence
exercised by the accused over the victim substitutes
for the element of physical force or intimidation in
cases of rape and, it may be added, acts of
lasciviousness. The Court has applied this rule to
rapes committed by:
a) fathers against their daughters
b) stepfathers against their stepdaughters
c) a godfather against his goddaughter
d) uncles against their nieces and
e) the first cousin of the victim's mother

When the offender in rape has an ascendancy or

influence over the girl, it is not necessary that she
put up a determined resistance.
When the offender is the father of the girl who
was yet of tender age, it is not necessary that there
be signs that she put up a determined resistance. A
sexual act between father and daughter is so
revolting that it would be hard to believe that the
complainant would have submitted thereto if her will
to resist had not been overpowered. (People v.
Alinea, C.A., 45 0.G., Supp. 5, 1940)
The kind of force or violence, threat or
intimidation as between father and daughter need not
154
be of such nature and degree as would be required in
other cases, for the father in this instance exercises
strong moral and physical influence and control over
his daughter. (People v. Rinion, C.A., O O.G. 4422)

Consummated rape.
For the consummation of the crime of rape, it is
not essential that there be a complete penetration of
the female organ; neither is it essential that there be
a rupture of the hymen.
It is enough that the labia of the female organ
was penetrated. The slightest penetration of the labia
consummates the crime of rape. (People. Oscar, 48
Phil. 527; People v. Hernandez, 49 Phil. 980)
The absence of spermatozoa does not disprove
the consummation of rape, the important
consideration being, not the emission of semen, but
penetration. (People v. Jose, 37 SCRA 450)

There is no crime of frustrated rape.

In the crime of rape, from the moment the
offender has carnal knowledge of his victim, he
actually attains his purpose and, from that moment
also, all the essential elements of the offense have
been accomplished. Nothing more is left to be done
by the offender, because he has performed the last
act necessary to produce the crime. Thus, the felony
is consummated. In a long line of cases, a uniform
rule has been set that for the consummation of rape,
perfect penetration is not essential. Any penetration
of the female organ by the male organ is sufficient.
Entry of the labia or lips of the female organ,
without rupture of the hymen or laceration of the
155
vagina, is sufficient to warrant conviction.
Necessarily, rape is attempted if there is no
penetration of the female organ because not all acts
of execution was performed. The offender merely
commenced the commission of a felony directly by
overt acts. Taking into account the nature, elements
and manner of execution of the crime of rape and
jurisprudence on the matter, it is hardly conceivable
how the frustrated stage in rape can ever be
committed. (People v. Orita, 184 SCRA 114-115)
Attempted rape.
Attempted rape was committed by the accused
after raising the dress of the woman then asleep and
placing himself on top of her, and when the woman
was awakened and the accused threatened her with a
knife hest of her continued shouting and offering of
resistance, a neighbor came to her rescue. (People v.
Tayaba, 62 Phil. 559)
Note: In this case, there was intent on the part of
the accused to carnal knowledge of the woman
against her will.

STATUTORY RAPE: When the girl is under 12

years of age.
(a) Where the offended party is less than twelve
years of age, rape is committed although she
consented to the sexual act. (People v. Villamor,
C.A., 37 0.G. 947; People v. Canencia, C.A. 51
O.G. 844)
(b) Sexual intercourse with a nine-year-old girl is
rape. (People v. Peido, C.A., 44 O.G. 2764)
(c) Rape is committed even if the girl under 12
years is a prostitute. (People v. Perez, C.A., 37 0.G.
1762)
156
 Note: The law does not consider that kind of
consent voluntary, as the offended party under 12
years old cannot have a will of her own.

Guidelines in appreciating age of victim in rape

cases.
1) The original or certified true copy of birth
certificate is the best evidence to prove the age of
the victim.
2) In the absence of the birth certificate, similar
authentic documents – i.e., baptismal certificate
and school records – showing the victim’s date of
birth may be submitted to the court.
3) Should the foregoing be not available on account
of loss or destruction, the credible testimony of
the mother or any relative by consanguinity or
affinity qualified to testify on matters respecting
pedigree shall be sufficient under certain
conditions.
4) If all the foregoing cannot be obtained, the
testimony of the victim will suffice provided that it
is expressly and clearly admitted by the accused.
(People v. Domingo, G.R. No. 177136, June 30,
2008, citing People v. Barcena, 482 SCRA 543)

Character of the offended woman is immaterial

in rape.
The fact that the offended party may have been
of an unchaste character constitutes no defense in a
charge of rape, provided that the illicit relations
were committed with force and violence, etc.
(People v. Blanco, 46 Phil. 113)

Multiple rape by two or more offenders.

157
 While Alfaro was having sexual intercourse with
the offended girl, Hernandez was threatening her
with his revolver, and when Hernandez was lying
with her, Alfaro was pointing to her his revolver.
Held: Each of the two accused should suffer two
sentences. (People v. Alfaro, et al., 91 Phil. 404)
Each of the four defendants who raped the
victim, having conspired with the others to rape her,
is responsible not only for the rape committed
personally by him, but also for those committed by
the others, because each sexual intercourse had,
through force by each one of them with the victim,
was consummated separately and independently
from that had by each of the others. Each of the
defendants was held liable for four crimes of rape, in
the commission of which he participated by direct
execution and by acts without which the commission
of the crimes would not have been accomplished.
(People v. Villa, et al., 81 Phil. 193)

Rape with homicide is a special complex crime.

Rape with homicide is now a special complex
crime, like robbery with homicide, in view of the
amendment to Article 335. The commentaries
relative to robbery with homicide, under Article 294,
on the meaning of phrase "by reason" may be
considered in the special complex crime of rape with
homicide.
The special complex crime of rape with
homicide is committed by the accused who, while
raping a 6-year-old girl strangled her to death in
order to silence her. The accused was sentenced to
death. (People v. y L-13780, January 28, 1961)

158
When the homicide is committed NOT by reason
or on the occasion of the rape.
The accused murdered two sisters. As the elder
sister was dying, the accused had carnal intercourse
with her.
The prosecution characterized the two murders
and rape as “double murder with rape” alleging in
the information that the rape was committed on the
occasion of the murders.
Held: This is not the special complex crime of
rape with homicide, since the victim was already at
the threshold of death when she was ravished. That
bestiality may be regarded either as a form of
ignominy causing disgrace or as a form of cruelty
which aggravated the murder of the elder sister, it
being unnecessary to the commission thereof (Arts.
14[17 and 20] and 248[6]), Revised Penal Code. The
accused is guilty of two separate murders. (People v.
Laspardas, 93 SCRA 638, 76 0.G. 2519)
Note: Another illustration of rape with homicide
is, where the rapist, who was suffering from
gonorrhea, infected the victim who died as a result.

Penalties for rape under paragraph 1 and rape

under paragraph 2, compared.
1) Rape committed under any of the four (4)
circumstances
Par. 1 - RECLUSION PERPETUA
Par. 2 - PRISION MAYOR
2) Rape committed with the use of a deadly
weapon or by two or more persons
Par. 1 - RECLUSION PERPETUA TO
DEATH

159
 Par. 2 - PRISION MAYOR TO
RECLUSION TEMPORAL
3) Rape where victim becomes insane
Par. 1 - RECLUSION PERPETUA TO
DEATH
Par. 2 - RECLUSION TEMPORAL
4) Attempted rape and homicide is committed
Par. 1 - RECLUSION PERPETUA TO
DEATH
Par. 2 - RECLUSION TEMPORAL TO
RECLUSION PERPETUA
5) Rape with homicide
Par. 1 - DEATH
Par. 2 - RECLUSION PERPETUA
6) Rape with aggravating/qualifying circumstances
Par. 1 - DEATH
Par. 2 - RECLUSION TEMPORAL

Indemnity in Rape.
The award of P50,000 as indemnity ex delicto is
mandatory upon the finding of the fact of rape.
(People v. Taño, G.R. No. 133872 [2000); People
Maglente, 306 SCRA 546 [1999])
If the crime of rape is committed or effectively
qualified by any of the circumstances under which
the death penalty is authorized by the present
amended law, the indemnity of the victim shall be in
the increased amount of not less than P75,000.
(People v. Victor, 292 SCRA 186 [1998]; People v.
Prades, 293 SCRA 411[1998]; People v. Mahinay,
302 SCRA 486 [1999])
The award of civil indemnity is not only a
reaction to the apathetic societal perception of the
penal law and the financial fluctuations over time,
160
but also an expression of the displeasure of the Court
over the incidence of heinous crimes against
chastity. (People v. Victor, 292 SCRA 186 [1998])

Indemnity in Rape with Homicide.

With regard to the civil indemnity, the Court
hereby rules that the victim of rape with homicide
should be awarded the amount of P100,000.
Prevailing judicial policy has authorized the
mandatory award of P50,000 in case of death, and
P50,000 upon the finding of the fact of rape. Also,
under recent case law, the indemnity for the victim
shall be in the increased amount of P75,000 if the
crime of rape committed is effectively qualified by
any of the circumstances under which the death
penalty is authorized by the applicable amendatory
laws. Thus, if homicide is committed by reason or
on the occasion of the rape, indemnity in the amount
of P100,000 is fully justified and properly
commensurate with the seriousness of the said
complex crime. (People v. Robles, Jr., 305 SCRA
273[1999])

Damages in Rape.
Moral damages in the amount of P50,000 is to
be automatic awarded in rape cases without need of
proof. (People v. Prades, 293 SCRA 411 [1998])
Moral damages may be awarded to the victim in
such amount as the court deems just without the
necessity for pleading or proof of mental or physical
suffering provided in Article 2217 of the Civil Code
other than the fact of the commission of the offense.
This is because it is recognized that the victim's
injury is concomitant with and necessarily resulting
161
from odious crime of rape to warrant per se the
award of moral damages. ( People v. Dizon, 309
SCRA 669 [1999])
Exemplary damages may be awarded in criminal
cases as part of the civil liability if the crime was
committed with one or more aggravating
circumstances. (People v. Batoon, G.R. No.
1341494, 26 October 1999)
Exemplary damages have been awarded in rape
cases committed by fathers against their daughters to
deter other fathers with pervert of aberrant sexual
behavior from sexually abusing their daughters.
(People v. Bayona, G.R. No. 13343, March 2, 2000;
People v. Mosqueda, 313 SCRA 694 [1999])

Art. 266-C. Effect of pardon. – The

subsequent valid marriage between the offender
and the offended party shall extinguish the
criminal action or the penalty imposed.
In case it is the legal husband who is the
offender, the subsequent forgiveness by the wife
as the offended party shall extinguish the
criminal action or the penalty: Provided, That the
crime shall not be extinguished or the penalty
shall not be abated if the marriage is void ab
initio. (Republic Act No. 8353)

Effect of marriage.
Marriage extinguishes not only the penal action,
but likewise the penalty that may be imposed.
(Laceste v. Santos, 56 Phil. 472; People Miranda,
57 Phil. 264; Art. 266-C)
In crimes against chastity, such effect benefits
not only the principals but also the accomplices and
162
accessories. (Art. 344, Revised Penal Code)
However, since rape has ceased to be a crime against
chastity, but is now a crime against persons, it now
appears that marriage extinguishes that penal action
and the penalty only as to the principal (i.e.,
husband) and not as to the accomplices and
accessories.
Further, this principle does not apply where
multiple rape is committed, because while marriage
with one defendant extinguishes the criminal
liability, its benefits cannot be extended to the acts
committed by the others of which he is a co-
principal. (People v. Bernardo, et al., C.A. 38, O.G.
3479)

Rape of wife by husband.

Prior to R.A. No. 8353, a husband cannot be
guilty of rape committed upon his wife because of
the matrimonial consent which she gave when she
assumed the marriage relation, and the law will not
permit her to retract in order to charge her husband
with the offense. (State v. Haines, 51 La. Ann. 731,
25 So. 372; 441 R.A. 837) The second paragraph of
Section 266-C of R.A. No. 8353 is explicit in
providing that a husband may be guilty of rape of his
wife when it states: “In case it is the legal husband
who is the offender x x x.”

When the legal husband is the offender.

In case it is the legal husband who is the
offender, the subsequent forgiveness by the wife as
the offended party shall extinguish the criminal
action or the penalty: Provided, That the crime shall
not be extinguished or the penalty shall not be
163
abated if the marriage is void ab initio. (Art. 266-C,
2nd par.)
It is only in crimes against chastity that
pardon/forgiveness by the offended party shall bar
the prosecution of the offense commit committed,
i.e., seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness.
Since rape is no longer a crime against chastity, but
is now a crime against persons, the provision that
“subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended
party shall extinguish the criminal action or the
penalty" is the exception to the rule that forgiveness
by the offended party shall not extinguish the penal
action in crimes against persons.

CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL LIBERTY

AND SECURITY
Chapter One
CRIMES AGAINST LIBERTY

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.chanrobles virtual law
library
2. If it shall have been committed simulating
public authority.chanrobles virtual law library
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.chanrobles virtual law library

164
4. If the person kidnapped or detained shall be a
minor, female or a public officer.chanrobles
virtual law library
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.
Art. 268. Slight illegal detention. — The penalty of
reclusion temporal shall be imposed upon any
private individual who shall commit the crimes
described in the next preceding article without
the attendance of any of circumstances
enumerated therein.chanrobles virtual law
library
The same penalty shall be incurred by anyone
who shall furnish the place for the perpetration
of the crime.chanrobles virtual law library
If the offender shall voluntarily release the
person so kidnapped or detained within three
days from the commencement of the detention,
without having attained the purpose intended,
and before the institution of criminal proceedings
against him, the penalty shall be prision mayor in
its minimum and medium periods and a fine not
exceeding seven hundred pesos.chanrobles virtual
law library
Art. 269. Unlawful arrest. — The penalty of
arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos
shall be imposed upon any person who, in any
case other than those authorized by law, or
without reasonable ground therefor, shall arrest
or detain another for the purpose of delivering
165
him to the proper authorities.chanrobles virtual
law library
Section Two. — Kidnapping of minors

Art. 270. Kidnapping and failure to return a

minor. — The penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be
imposed upon any person who, being entrusted with
the custody of a minor person, shall deliberately fail
to restore the latter to his parents or guardians.
Art. 271. Inducing a minor to abandon his
home. — The penalty of prision correccional and
a fine not exceeding seven hundred pesos shall be
imposed upon anyone who shall induce a minor
to abandon the home of his parent or guardians
or the persons entrusted with his
custody.chanrobles virtual law library
If the person committing any of the crimes
covered by the two preceding articles shall be the
father or the mother of the minor, the penalty
shall be arresto mayor or a fine not exceeding
three hundred pesos, or both.chanrobles virtual
law library
Art. 272. Slavery. — The penalty of prision mayor
and a fine of not exceeding 10,000 pesos shall be
imposed upon anyone who shall purchase, sell,
kidnap or detain a human being for the purpose
of enslaving him.chanrobles virtual law library
If the crime be committed for the purpose of
assigning the offended party to some immoral
traffic, the penalty shall be imposed in its
maximum period.chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 273. Exploitation of child labor. — The
penalty of prision correccional in its minimum
and medium periods and a fine not exceeding 500
166
pesos shall be imposed upon anyone who, under
the pretext of reimbursing himself of a debt
incurred by an ascendant, guardian or person
entrusted with the custody of a minor, shall,
against the latter's will, retain him in his
service.chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 274. Services rendered under compulsion in
payment of debt. — The penalty of arresto mayor
in its maximum period to prision correccional in
its minimum period shall be imposed upon any
person who, in order to require or enforce the
payment of a debt, shall compel the debtor to
work for him, against his will, as household
servant or farm laborer.chanrobles virtual law
library
Chapter Two
CRIMES AGAINST SECURITY
Section One. — Abandonment of helpless persons
and exploitation of minors.chanrobles virtual law
library
Art. 275. Abandonment of person in danger and
abandonment of one's own victim. — The penalty
of arresto mayor shall be imposed upon:
1. Any one who shall fail to render assistance to
any person whom he shall find in an uninhabited
place wounded or in danger of dying, when he
can render such assistance without detriment to
himself, unless such omission shall constitute a
more serious offense.chanrobles virtual law
library
2. Anyone who shall fail to help or render
assistance to another whom he has accidentally
wounded or injured.chanrobles virtual law
library
167
3. Anyone who, having found an abandoned child
under seven years of age, shall fail to deliver said
child to the authorities or to his family, or shall
fail to take him to a safe place.chanrobles virtual
law library
Art. 276. Abandoning a minor. — The penalty of
arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos
shall be imposed upon any one who shall abandon a
child under seven years of age, the custody of which
is incumbent upon him.
When the death of the minor shall result from
such abandonment, the culprit shall be punished
by prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods; but if the life of the minor
shall have been in danger only, the penalty shall
be prision correccional in its minimum and
medium periods.chanrobles virtual law library
The provisions contained in the two preceding
paragraphs shall not prevent the imposition of
the penalty provided for the act committed, when
the same shall constitute a more serious
offense.chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 277. Abandonment of minor by person
entrusted with his custody; indifference of
parents. — The penalty of arresto mayor and a
fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed
upon anyone who, having charge of the rearing
or education of a minor, shall deliver said minor
to a public institution or other persons, without
the consent of the one who entrusted such child to
his care or in the absence of the latter, without
the consent of the proper authorities.chanrobles
virtual law library

168
The same penalty shall be imposed upon the
parents who shall neglect their children by not
giving them the education which their station in
life require and financial conditions
permit.chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 278. Exploitation of minors. — The penalty of
prision correccional in its minimum and medium
periods and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall
be imposed upon:
1. Any person who shall cause any boy or girl
under sixteen years of age to perform any
dangerous feat of balancing, physical strength, or
contortion.chanrobles virtual law library
2. Any person who, being an acrobat, gymnast,
rope-walker, diver, wild-animal tamer or circus
manager or engaged in a similar calling, shall
employ in exhibitions of these kinds children
under sixteen years of age who are not his
children or descendants.chanrobles virtual law
library
3. Any person engaged in any of the callings
enumerated in the next paragraph preceding who
shall employ any descendant of his under twelve
years of age in such dangerous
exhibitions.chanrobles virtual law library
4. Any ascendant, guardian, teacher or person
entrusted in any capacity with the care of a child
under sixteen years of age, who shall deliver such
child gratuitously to any person following any of
the callings enumerated in paragraph 2 hereof, or
to any habitual vagrant or beggar.chanrobles
virtual law library

If the delivery shall have been made in

169
consideration of any price, compensation, or
promise, the penalty shall in every case be
imposed in its maximum period.chanrobles
virtual law library
In either case, the guardian or curator convicted
shall also be removed from office as guardian or
curator; and in the case of the parents of the
child, they may be deprived, temporarily or
perpetually, in the discretion of the court, of their
parental authority.chanrobles virtual law library
5. Any person who shall induce any child under
sixteen years of age to abandon the home of its
ascendants, guardians, curators, or teachers to
follow any person engaged in any of the callings
mentioned in paragraph 2 hereof, or to
accompany any habitual vagrant or
beggar.chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 279. Additional penalties for other offenses. —
The imposition of the penalties prescribed in the
preceding articles, shall not prevent the imposition
upon the same person of the penalty provided for
any other felonies defined and punished by this
Code.
Section Two. — Trespass to dwelling

Art. 280. Qualified trespass to dwelling. — Any

private person who shall enter the dwelling of
another against the latter's will shall be punished by
arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos.
If the offense be committed by means of violence
or intimidation, the penalty shall be prision
correccional in its medium and maximum periods
and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos.chanrobles
virtual law library
170
The provisions of this article shall not be
applicable to any person who shall enter
another's dwelling for the purpose of preventing
some serious harm to himself, the occupants of
the dwelling or a third person, nor shall it be
applicable to any person who shall enter a
dwelling for the purpose of rendering some
service to humanity or justice, nor to anyone who
shall enter cafes, taverns, inn and other public
houses, while the same are open.chanrobles
virtual law library
Art. 281. Other forms of trespass. — The penalty
of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200
pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any person
who shall enter the closed premises or the fenced
estate of another, while either or them are
uninhabited, if the prohibition to enter be
manifest and the trespasser has not secured the
permission of the owner or the caretaker
thereof.chanrobles virtual law library
Section Three. — Threats and coercion

Art. 282. Grave threats. — Any person who shall

threaten another with the infliction upon the person,
honor or property of the latter or of his family of any
wrong amounting to a crime, shall suffer:
1. The penalty next lower in degree than that
prescribed by law for the crime be threatened to
commit, if the offender shall have made the
threat demanding money or imposing any other
condition, even though not unlawful, and said
offender shall have attained his purpose. If the
offender shall not have attained his purpose, the

171
penalty lower by two degrees shall be
imposed.chanrobles virtual law library
If the threat be made in writing or through a
middleman, the penalty shall be imposed in its
maximum period.chanrobles virtual law library
2. The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not
exceeding 500 pesos, if the threat shall not have
been made subject to a condition.chanrobles
virtual law library
Art. 283. Light threats. — Any threat to commit a
wrong not constituting a crime, made in the manner
expressed in subdivision 1 of the next preceding
article, shall be punished by arresto mayor.
Art. 284. Bond for good behavior. — In all cases
falling within the two next preceding articles, the
person making the threats may also be required
to give bail not to molest the person threatened,
or if he shall fail to give such bail, he shall be
sentenced to destierro.chanrobles virtual law
library
Art. 285. Other light threats. — The penalty of
arresto menor in its minimum period or a fine
not exceeding 200 pesos shall be imposed upon:
1. Any person who, without being included in the
provisions of the next preceding article, shall
threaten another with a weapon or draw such
weapon in a quarrel, unless it be in lawful self-
defense.chanrobles virtual law library
2. Any person who, in the heat of anger, shall
orally threaten another with some harm not
constituting a crime, and who by subsequent acts
show that he did not persist in the idea involved
in his threat, provided that the circumstances of
the offense shall not bring it within the provisions
172
of Article 282 of this Code.chanrobles virtual law
library
3. Any person who shall orally threaten to do
another any harm not constituting a
felony.chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 286. Grave coercions. — The penalty of arresto
mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be
imposed upon any person who, without authority of
law, shall, by means of violence, prevent another
from doing something not prohibited by law, or
compel him to do something against his will,
whether it be right or wrong.
If the coercion be committed for the purpose of
compelling another to perform any religious act
or to prevent him from so doing, the penalty next
higher in degree shall be imposed.chanrobles
virtual law library
Art. 287. Light coercions. — Any person who, by
means of violence, shall seize anything belonging
to his debtor for the purpose of applying the same
to the payment of the debt, shall suffer the
penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum period
and a fine equivalent to the value of the thing, but
in no case less than 75 pesos.chanrobles virtual
law library
Any other coercions or unjust vexations shall be
punished by arresto menor or a fine ranging
from 5 pesos to 200 pesos, or both.chanrobles
virtual law library
Art. 288. Other similar coercions; (Compulsory
purchase of merchandise and payment of wages by
means of tokens.) — The penalty of arresto mayor
or a fine ranging from 200 to 500 pesos, or both,
shall be imposed upon any person, agent or
173
officer, of any association or corporation who
shall force or compel, directly or indirectly, or
shall knowingly permit any laborer or employee
employed by him or by such firm or corporation
to be forced or compelled, to purchase
merchandise or commodities of any
kind.chanrobles virtual law library
The same penalties shall be imposed upon any
person who shall pay the wages due a laborer or
employee employed by him, by means of tokens
or objects other than the legal tender currency of
the laborer or employee.chanrobles virtual law
library

CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY

GENERAL*

Art. 293. Who are guilty of robbery. – Any

person who, with intent to gain, shall take any
personal property belonging to another, by
means of violence against or intimidation of any
person, or using force upon anything, shall be
guilty of robbery.

Robbery, defined.
Robbery is the taking of personal property
belonging to another, with intent to gain, by means
of violence against, or intimidation of any person, or
using force upon anything.

Classification of robbery.
1. Robbery with violence against, or intimidation
of persons. (Arts. 294, 297 and 298)

174
2. Robbery by the use of force upon things. (Arts.
299 and 302)

Elements of robbery in general.

a. That there be (1) personal property, (2)
belonging to another;
b. That there is (3) unlawful taking of that
property;
c. That the taking must be (4) with intent to gain;
and
d. That there is (5) violence against or intimidation
of any person, of force upon anything.

Personal property.
The property taken must be personal property,
for if real property occupied or real right is usurped
by means of violence against or intimidation of
person, the crime is usurpation. (Art. 312)

Section One. – Robbery with violence against or

intimidation of persons
Art. 294. Robbery with violence against or
intimidation of persons – Penalties. – Any person
guilty of robbery with the use of violence against
or intimidation of any person shall suffer:
1. The penalty of reclusion perpetua to
death, when by reason or on occasion of the
robbery, the crime of homicide shall have been
committed; or when the robbery shall have been
accompanied by rape or intentional mutilation or
arson;
2. The penalty of reclusion temporal in its
medium period to reclusion perpetua, when by
175
reason or on occasion of such robbery, any of the
physical injuries penalized in subdivision 1 of
Article 263 shall have been inflicted;
3. The penalty of reclusion temporal, when
by reason or on occasion of the robbery, any of
the physical injuries penalized in subdivision 2 of
the article mentioned in the next preceding
paragraph, shall have been inflicted;
4. The penalty of prision mayor in its
maximum period to reclusion temporal in its
medium period, if the violence or intimidation
employed in the commission of the robbery shall
have been carried to a degree clearly unnecessary
for the commission of the crime, or when in the
course of its execution, the offender shall have
inflicted upon any person not responsible for its
commission any of the physical injuries covered
by subdivisions 3 and 4 of said Article 263;
5. The penalty of prision correccional in its
maximum period to prision mayor in its medium
period in other cases. (As amended by R.A. No.
7659)

Acts punished as robbery with violence against or

intimidation of persons:
1. When by reason or on occasion of the robbery
(taking of personal property belonging to another
with intent to gain), the crime of homicide is
committed;
2. When the robbery is accompanied by rape or
intentional mutilation or arson;
3. When by reason or on occasion of such robbery,
any of the physical injuries resulting in insanity,
imbecility, impotency or blindness is inflicted;
176
4. When by reason or on occasion of robbery, any
of the physical injuries resulting in the loss of the
use of speech or the power to hear or to smell, or
the loss of an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a leg
or the loss of the use of any such member or
incapacity for the work in which the injured person
is theretofore habitually engaged is inflicted;
5. If the violence or intimidation employed in the
commission of the robbery is carried to a degree
clearly unnecessary for the commission of the
crime;
6. When in the course of its execution, the offender
shall have inflicted upon any person not
responsible for the commission of the robbery any of
the physical injuries in consequence of which the
person injured becomes deformed or loses any
other member of his body or loses the use thereof or
becomes ill or incapacitated for the performance of
the work in which he is habitually engaged for
more than 90 days or the person injured becomes ill
or incapacitated for labor for more than 30 days;
7. If the violence employed by the offender does
not cause any of the serious physical injuries
defined in Article 263, or if the offender employs
intimidation only.

The crime defined in this article is a special

complex crime.
Article 48, defining complex crime, does not
apply to the crimes covered by Article 294. The
latter Article already provides a specific penalty for
each kind of robbery with violence against persons
in the first, second, third and fourth paragraphs
thereof. There is only one penalty prescribed, even if
177
two crimes are committed. Article 48 applies only
when a complex crime is not punished with a
specific penalty.

“On the occasion" or "by reason" of the robbery.

Note the phrases "on the occasion" and "by
reason" of the robbery. These phrases mean that the
homicide or serious physical injuries defined in
paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 263 must be
committed in the course or because of the robbery.

The crime of homicide committed on the occasion

of the robbery.
Where the victim was killed on the occasion
when the four accused were taking the chickens
under the house of the victim, the offense is robbery
with homicide, not theft and homicide. (People v.
Mabasa, 65 Phil. 568)

Note:
1.Robbery and homicide are separate offenses,
when the homicide was not committed "on
the occasion" or "by reason” of the robbery.
2.Robbery and Homicide as separate crimes.
3.Where the original design comprehends
robbery, and homicide is perpetrated by
reason or on occasion of the consummation of
the former, the crime committed is robbery
with homicide.
PARAGRAPH 1: ROBBERY WITH
HOMICIDE

178
 This is a special complex crime, punished as a
single crime, although robbery and homicide are
committed by the offender.

Meaning of "homicide."
The term “homicide” as used in paragraph No. 1
of Article 294, is to be understood in its generic
sense as to include parricide and murder.

The juridical concept of robbery with homicide

does not limit the taking of life to one single
victim or to ordinary homicide.
The juridical concept of robbery with homicide
does not limit the taking of life to one single victim
making the slaying of human beings in excess of that
number punishable as separate, independent offense
or offenses. All the homicides or murders are
merged in the composite, integrated whole that is
robbery with homicide so long as all the killings
were perpetrated by reason or on the occasion of the
robbery. (People v. Madrid, 88 Phil. 2)
There is no special complex crime of robbery in
band with double homicide and/or serious, less
serious or slight physical injuries under the present
Code. If robbery with homicide (or with the other
crimes enumerated above) is committed by a band,
the indictable offense would still be robbery with
homicide under Article 294(1), but the circumstance
that it was committed by a band is not an element of
the crime but is merely a generic aggravating
circumstance which may be offset by mitigating
circumstances. The homicides or murders and
physical injuries, irrespective of the numbers,
committed on the occasion or by reason of the
179
robbery are merged in the composite crime of
“robbery with homicide.” (People v. Pedroso, 115
SCRA 599)
The robbery with homicide absorbed the
physical injuries. (People v. Roberto Mendoza, 76
0.G. 8264, November 3, 1980, citing People v.
Maranan, 121 Phil. 620) Where injuries were
committed apart from robbery and homicide, the
crime is only robbery with homicide, physical
injuries being absorbed by the former. (People v.
Veloso, 112 SCRA 173)

Note:
1.There is no such crime as robbery with murder.
2.Robbery with homicide in a dwelling does not
require that robbery with force upon things is
first committed.
3.An intent to take personal property belonging to
another with intent to gain must precede the
killing.
4.The crime is robbery with homicide, even if the
motive of the offenders was that of robbery as
well as vengeance.
5.Killing a person to escape after the commission
of robbery is robbery with homicide.
6.Homicide may precede robbery or may occur
after robbery.
7.Attempted homicide or attempted murder
committed during or on the occasion of the
robbery is absorbed in the crime of Robbery
with Homicide.
8.When homicide is not proved, the crime is only
robbery.

180
 9.When robbery is not proved, the crime is only
homicide.
10. All who participated in the robbery as
principals are principals in robbery with
homicide.
11.

Question?

1.Is it robbery with homicide if the person

killed is a robber himself?

2.It is robbery with homicide even if the death

of a person supervened by mere accident?

3.In robbery with homicide, must the person

charged as accessory have knowledge of the
commission, not only of robbery, but also of
homicide?

Robbery with Homicide Distinguished from

Highway Robbery.
The trial court erred in convicting accused-
appellant of the crime of highway robbery with
homicide. To be sure, the crime accused-appellant
committed was robbery with homicide, not highway
robbery as defined in P.D. No. 532. Conviction for
highway robbery requires proof that several accused
were organized for the purpose of committing it
indiscriminately.

181
 In the case at bar, there is no proof that accused-
appellant and "Johnny" organized themselves to
commit highway robbery. The prosecution
established only a single act of robbery against a
particular person. This is not what is contemplated
under P.D. No. 532, the objective of which is to
deter and punish lawless elements who commit acts
of depredation upon persons and properties of
innocent and defenseless inhabitants who travel from
one place to another, thereby disturbing the peace
and tranquility of the nation and stunting the
economic and social progress of the people.
Consequently, accused-appellant should be held
liable for the special complex crime of robbery with
homicide. Under Article 294 of the Revised Penal
Code when homicide is committed by reason or on
the occasion of robbery, the penalty to be imposed is
reclusion perpetua to death. (People v. Pascual, Jr.,
G.R. No. 132870, May 29, 2002)

PARAGRAPH 2: ROBBERY WITH RAPE

As regards the special complex crime of robbery
with rape, the law uses the phrase "when the robbery
shall have been accompanied by rape.”
But like in robbery with homicide, the offender
must have the intent to take the personal property
belonging to another with intent to gain and such
intent must precede the rape.

Rape committed on the occasion of the robbery.

This is usually committed when, while some
robbers are ransacking for personal property in the
house, the other is raping a woman in the same
house.
182
Even if the rape was committed in another place,
it is still robbery with rape.
In the case of U.S. v. Tiongco, et al., 37 Phil.
951, two of the offenders compelled two women,
living in the house where the robbery was
committed, to go with them. While on the way to the
place where they had their banca hidden, the two
men separated themselves from the band and took
the two women to a place near the river where,
through force and intimidation, they raped them.
Thereafter, the two men left the women and joined
their companions.
Held: Robbery with rape was committed. It is
not necessary that the rape be committed prior to or
simultaneously with the robbery. So the law says, in
the definition of the crime, that when the robbery is
accompanied by rape or mutilation, etc.
Note: But if the rape is committed against a
woman in a house other than that where the robbery
is committed, the rape should be considered a
separate offense.

Rape was committed before taking of personal

property.
At about one o'clock in the morning of June 28,
1946, the appellant and Gil Sayuco, together with
two unidentified companions, went to the house of
Magdaleno Berti. After tying Magdaleno to the wall,
the appellant entered the room of Benedicta Berti, a
17-year-old daughter of Magdaleno. The appellant
dragged her out and, with the aid of Gil Sayuco,
brought her downstairs under a mango tree.
Notwithstanding the girl's cries for help, her father
183
and mother could not come to her rescue, the first
being then tied to the wall and the second having
been pushed away whenever she attempted to
intervene. In spite of Benedicta's resistance, the
appellant, with the help of his three companions, was
able to have sexual intercourse with Benedicta. Gil
Sayuco then took his turn in raping the girl, followed
in succession by the other two companions. Not
contented with merely satisfying their lust, the
appellant, Gil Sayuco, and another companion
returned to the house and took away a rice bowl,
some rice and four chickens, all worth about fifteen
pesos. (People v. Canastre, 82 Phil. 482)
In this case, the intention of the culprits from the
beginning was to take personal property. Even if the
rape was committed before the taking of the rice and
chickens, they were guilty of robbery with rape.
Rape was not their primary objective.

There is no such crime as robbery with attempted

rape.
Article 294, par. 2, which punishes robbery with
rape (consummated) does not cover robbery with
attempted rape.
The crime cannot be a complex crime of robbery
with attempted rape under Article 48, because a
robbery cannot be a necessary means to commit
attempted rape; nor attempted rape, to commit
robbery. Both crimes cannot be the result of a single
act. (See People v. Cariaga, C.A., 54 0.G. 4307)

Note:
1.When the taking of personal property of a
woman is an independent act following
184
 defendant's failure to consummate the rape,
there are two distinct crimes committed:
attempted rape and theft.
2.Additional rapes committed on the same
occasion of robbery will not increase the
penalty.
3.When the taking of property after the rape is not
with intent to gain, there is neither theft nor
robbery committed.
4.Violence or intimidation need not be present
before or at the exact moment when the object is
taken.

When rape and homicide co-exist in the

commission of robbery.
When the accused committed robbery in a
house, killed the head of the family there and raped
his wife in the ricefield to which she had been taken,
the crime is robbery with homicide and rape under
paragraph 1 of Article 294, the rape to be considered
as an aggravating circumstance only. (People v.
Ganal, et al., 85 Phil. 743; People v. Bacsa, 104
Phil. 136; People v. Villa, 93 SCRA 716)
The trial court correctly designated the crime as
robbery with homicide, with rape being considered
as an aggravating circumstance. In the two instances
when the assailants struck, their overriding intention
was to commit robbery. After the children had been
hogtied in the Semacio's premises, one of the armed
men demanded money and jewelry. Thereafter, they
started to ransack the house. When the husband of
Zenaida arrived, the robbers went out and promptly
killed him and his luckless companions. In the house
of the Samoy's, all the male occupants were asked to
185
come out first. Only then did the men begin to
ransack the place. After ransacking the house, the
male occupants were shot to death. As for the rapes
committed then, the trial court was correct in
treating the raping of Elvira Samoy and Zenaida
Semacio as an aggravating circumstance. (People v.
Timple 237 SCRA 52)

Robbery with serious physical injuries under

Article 263, par. 2 (Art. 294, par. 3).
In a case, the accused assaulted the victim and
robbed him of P17.00.The victim lost the hearing of
one ear, as a result of one of the blows received from
the accused. The Supreme Court held that the
accused was guilty of robbery under Article 294,
par. 3, the physical injuries inflicted being covered
by Article 263, par. 2. (People v. Luncay, 49 Phil.
464)
Note: This ruling is inconsistent with the ruling
in the case of People v. Hernandez, 94 Phil. 49, as
regards the crime of serious physical injuries
committed. In that case, it was held that as the
offended party may still hear through his left ear, the
case falls under Article 263, par. 3.
Had the ruling been the same as that in the
Hernandez case, the robbery would have been
punished under Article 294, par. 4.

Robbery with unnecessary violence and

intimidation (Art. 294, par. 4).
Tying the victim after wounding him and
leaving him tied to the trunk of a tree on the craggy
ground after taking his money constitutes
unnecessary violence and intimidation referred to in
186
par. 4 of Article 294. (People v. Manzanilla, et al.,
43 Phil. 167)
The violence need not result in serious physical
injuries. All that the first clause in par. 4 of Article
294 requires is that the violence be unnecessary for
the commission of the robbery.

Requisites of robbery under the second case of

paragraph 4 of Article 294.
1. That any of the physical injuries defined in
paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 263 was inflicted in
the course of the robbery; and
2. That any of them was inflicted upon any person
not responsible for the commission of the robbery.

Violence or intimidation need not be present

before or at the exact moment when the object is
taken.
Violence or intimidation may enter at any time
before the owner is finally deprived of his property.
This is so, because asportation is a complex fact, a
whole divisible into parts, a series of acts, in the
course of which personal violence or intimidation
may be injected.
Thus, where a person picked the pocket of
another who, becoming aware of it, tried to recover
his property, but a companion of the thief prevented
him by using force and violence, the crime
committed is robbery in cause violence was used
before the owner is finally deprived of the property.
(People v. Omambong, C.A., G.R. No. 44645, June
3, 1936)

187
Robbery with violence or intimidation "in other
cases” referred to in paragraph 5 is committed
by:
1. Snatching money from the hands of the victim
and pushing her to prevent her from recovering the
seized property. (U.S. v. Samonte, 8 Phil. 286)
2. Grabbing pawn ticket from the hands of another
and intimidating him. (U.S. v. Blanco, 10 Phil.
298)

Note:
1.When the act of snatching a thing from his
hands did not result in violence against the
person of the offended party, the crime of
robbery is not committed.
2.In robbery with intimidation, there must be
acts done by the accused which, either by
their own nature or by reason of the
circumstances under which they are executed,
inspire fear in the person against whom they
are directed.
Threats to extort money distinguished from
robbery through intimidation.
In both crimes, there is intimidation by the
offender. The purpose, when threat is made to extort
money, is identical – to obtain gain.
The differences are:
(1) In robbery, the intimidation is actual and
immediate; whereas in threats, the intimidation
is conditional or future, that is, not immediate;
(2) In robbery, the intimidation is personal,
while in threats, it may be through an
intermediary;
188
 (3) In threats, the intimidation may refer to the
person, honor or property of the offended
party or that of his family; while in robbery, the
intimidation is directed only to the person of
the victim;
(4) In robbery, the gain of the culprit is
immediate; whereas in threats, the gain of the
culprit is not immediate. (People v. Moreno, C.A.,
G.R. No. 43635, April 30, 1936)

Robbery with violence distinguished from grave

coercion.
(1) In both crimes, there is violence used by the
offender;
(2) While in robbery, there is intent to gain, such
element is not present in coercion.
The only distinction between these two crimes is
just a matter of intention. If the purpose of the
accused in taking somebody's property by or
intimidation is to obtain gain, the crime is robbery;
but if his purpose is to compel another to do
something against his will, without authority of law,
but believing himself to be the owner or creditor,
and thereby seizes property, then the crime is grave
coercion. (People v. Zanoria, et al., C.A., 53 O.G.
5266, citing U.S. v. Vega, 2 Phil. 167; People v.
Mojica, et al., C.A., 0.G. 7019. U.S. v. Villa-Abrille,
36 Phil. 807; and People v. Luciano, CA-G.R. No.
2374-R, October 28, 1949)

Problem:
A lost his watch. One day, A saw B using the
watch. A, recognizing the watch, asked B to give it
to him because it was his property. Because B
189
refused, A, with drawn pistol, told him that if B
would not give him the watch, A would kill him.
Because of fear for his life, B gave the watch to A
against B's will.
Is the crime committed by A robbery, grave
threats or grave coercion?

Art. 295. Robbery with physical injuries,

committed in an uninhabited place and by a band,
or with the use of firearm on a street, road or alley.
– If the offenses mentioned in subdivisions three,
four, and five of the next preceding article shall
have been committed in an uninhabited place or
by a band or by attacking a moving train, street
car, motor vehicle or airship, or by entering the
passengers' compartments in a train or, in any
manner, taking the passengers thereof by
surprise in the respective conveyances, or on a
street, road, highway, or alley, and the
intimidation is made with the use of a firearm,
the offender shall be punished by the maximum
period of the proper penalties. (As amended by
R.A. No. 14, Sec. 2, and R.A. No. 373)

When is robbery with violence against or

intimidation of persons qualified?
If any of the offenses defined in subdivisions 3,
4 and 5 of Article 294 is committed –
(1) in an uninhabited place, or
(2) by a band, or
(3) by attacking a moving train, street car, motor
vehicle, or airship, or

190
(4) by entering the passengers' compartments in a
train, or in any manner taking the passengers
thereof by surprise in the respective conveyances, or
(5) on a street, road, highway, or alley, and the
intimidation is made with the use of firearms, the
offender shall be punished by the maximum periods
of the proper penalties prescribed in Article 294.

Must be alleged in the information.

Any of these five qualifying circumstances of
robbery with physical injuries or intimidation must
be alleged in the information and proved during the
trial.

Being qualifying, it cannot be offset by a generic

mitigating circumstance.
Any of these qualifying circumstances cannot be
offset by a generic mitigating circumstance.
If robbery by a band is committed in an
uninhabited place, "by a band” is qualifying and
“uninhabited place” would be generic aggravating
circumstance only. (See U.S. v. Gapas, 18 Phil. 629)

The intimidation with the use of firearm qualifies

only robbery on a street, road, highway or alley.
This is indicated in the head note of the article
which says: "or with the use of firearm on a street,
road, highway, or alley."

Article 295 does not apply to robbery with

homicide, or robbery with rape, or robbery with
serious physical injuries under paragraph 1 of
Article 263.

191
 Article 295 provides for different cases in which
robbery with violence against or intimidation of
persons is qualified.
This article does not apply:
(1) When by reason or on occasion of the
robbery, the crime or homicide is committed
(subdivision 1, Art. 294);
(2) When the robbery is accompanied by rape
or intentional mutilation, or arson (subdivision
1, Art. 294); or
(3) If by reason or on occasion of robbery, any
of the serious physical injuries resulting in
insanity, imbecility, impotency or blindness is
inflicted (subdivision 2, Art. 294).
The reason is that this article mentions
subdivisions 3, 4 and 5 of Article 294, omitting
subdivisions 1 and 2 which refer to robbery with
homicide, robbery with rape, robbery with
intentional mutilation and robbery with serious
physical injuries resulting in insanity, imbecility,
impotency or blindness of the victim.
Thus, when robbery with homicide was
committed by attacking a motor vehicle or moving
train, or on the street, road, highway or alley with
the use of firearms, the penalty prescribed by
subdivision 1 of Article 294 shall not be imposed in
the maximum period. The same is true with respect
to robbery with rape or robbery with intentional
mutilation.
However, if there is no mitigating circumstance
to offset it, the fact that robbery with homicide or
robbery with rape is committed in an uninhabited
place or by a band will have the effect of increasing
the penalty to the maximum period, because it will
192
be considered as an aggravating circumstance under
Article 14.
Article 295 is inapplicable to robbery with
homicide, rape, intentional mutilation, and lesiones
graves resulting in insanity, imbecility, impotency or
blindness. If the foregoing classes of robbery which
are described in Article 294 (1) and (2) are
perpetrated by a band, they would not be punishable
under Article 295, but then, cuadrilla would be
generic aggravating circumstance under Article 14
of the Code. (People v. Salip Manla, 30 SCRA 389;
People v. Damaso, 86 SCRA 370)

Section Two. – Robbery by the use of force upon

things
This is the other kind of robbery. The person
liable for robbery by the use of force upon things,
does not use violence against or intimidation of any
person in taking personal property belonging to
another with intent to gain, for, otherwise, he will be
liable under Article 294.
Robbery by the use of force upon things is
committed only when either (1) the offender entered
a house or building by any of the means specified in
Article 299 or Article 302, or (2) even if there was
no entrance by any of those means, he broke a
wardrobe, chest, or any other kind of locked or
closed or sealed furniture or receptacle in the house
or building, or he took it away to be broken or
forced open outside. In any of such cases, the taking
of personal property belonging to another with intent
to gain from the broken furniture or receptacle, or
the taking away of the locked or closed or sealed
193
furniture or receptacle to be broken or forced open
outside the house or building would be robbery.

What are the two kinds of robbery with force

upon things?
They are:
1. Robbery in an inhabited house or public
building or edifice devoted to religious
worship. (Art. 299)
2. Robbery in an uninhabited place or in a
private building. (Art. 302)
One essential requisite of robbery with force
upon things under Articles 299 and 302 is that the
malefactor should enter the building or dependency
where the object to be taken is found. Articles 299
and 304 clearly contemplate that the malefactor
should enter the building (casa habitada o lugar
habitado o edificio). If the culprit did not enter the
building, there would be no robbery with force upon
things. (People v. Jaranilla, 55 SCRA 563)

Art. 299. Robbery in an inhabited house or

public building or edifice devoted to worship. –
Any armed person who shall commit robbery in
an inhabited house or public building or edifice
devoted to religious worship, shall be punished by
reclusion temporal, if the value of the property
taken shall exceed 250 pesos, and if –
(a) The malefactors shall enter the house or
building in which the robbery is committed, by
any of the following means:
1. Through an opening not intended for
entrance or egress;
194
 2. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or
breaking any door or window;
3. By using false keys, picklocks, or
similar tools;
4. By using any fictitious name or
pretending the exercise of public
authority.
Or if –
(b) The robbery be committed under any of
the following circumstances:
1. By breaking of doors, wardrobes,
chests, or any other kind of locked or
sealed furniture or receptacle;
2. By taking such furniture or objects
away to be broken or forced open
outside the place of the robbery.
When the offenders do not carry arms and
the value of the property taken exceeds 250 pesos,
the penalty next lower in degree shall be imposed.
The same rule shall be applied when the
offenders are armed, but the value of the
property taken does not exceed 250 pesos.
When said offenders do not carry arms and
the value taken does not exceed 250 pesos, they
shall suffer the penalty prescribed in the two next
preceding paragraphs, in its minimum period.
If the robbery be committed in one of the
dependencies of an inhabited house, public
building, or building dedicated to religious
worship, the penalties next lower in degree than
those prescribed in this article shall be imposed.
(As amended by R.A. No. 18)

195
Robbery with force upon things under Article
299 are of two kinds.
Note that Article 299 has two subdivisions; they
are subdivision (a) and subdivision (b).

ROBBERY WITH FORCE UPON THINGS

UNDER SUBDIVISION (A).
Elements:
1. That the offender entered (a) an inhabited place,
or (b) public building, or (c) edifice devoted to
religious worship.
2. That the entrance was effected by any of the
following means:
a. Through an opening not intended for
entrance or egress;
b. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or
breaking any door or window;
c. By using false keys, picklocks or similar
tools; or
d. By using any fictitious name or pretending
the exercise of public authority.
3. That once inside the building, the offender took
personal property belonging to another with
intent to gain.

ROBBERY WITH FORCE UPON THINGS

UNDER SUBDIVISION (B) OF ARTICLE 299.
Elements:
1. That the offender is inside a dwelling house,
public building, or edifice devoted to religious
worship, regardless of the circumstances under
which he entered it;

196
2. That the offender takes personal property
belonging to another, with intent to gain, under any
of the following circumstances:
a. by the breaking of doors, wardrobes, chests,
or any other kind of locked or sealed furniture
or receptacle; or
b. by taking such furniture or objects away to
be broken or forced open outside the
place of the robbery.

Entrance into the building by any of the means

mentioned in subdivision (a) of Article 299 is not
required in robbery under subdivision (b) of
same article.
It will be noted that the robbery defined in
Article 299 is committed in two ways, as stated in
subdivisions (a) and (b). Subdivisions (a) and (b) are
separated by the words “or if,” indicating thereby
that each subdivision is independent of the other.
Hence, to commit the robbery defined in
subdivision (b) of Article 299, it is not necessary that
the offender should have entered the building by any
of the means mentioned in subdivision (a).
Thus, a guest in the house of the offended party
or a servant in that house may be guilty of this kind
of robbery if he breaks open a locked wardrobe or
chest inside that house or if he takes it outside to be
broken, and once broken, takes therefrom personal
property.

Note:
1.Breaking the keyhole of the door of a
wardrobe, which is locked, is breaking a
locked furniture.
197
 2.When sealed box or receptacle is taken out of
the house or building for the purpose of
breaking it outside, it is not necessary that it
is actually opened.
3.It is estafa or theft, if the locked or sealed
receptacle is not forced open in the building
where it is kept or taken therefrom to be
broken outside.

Art. 300. Robbery in an uninhabited place and

by a band. – The robbery mentioned in the next
preceding article, if committed in an uninhabited
place and by a band, shall be punished by the
maximum period of the penalty provided
therefor.

Robbery in an inhabited house, public building

or edifice devoted to religious worship is qualified
when committed by a band and in an uninhabited
place.
The robbery mentioned in Article 299, if
committed in an uninhabited place and by a band,
shall be punished by the maximum period of the
penalty provided therefor.
The two qualifications (uninhabited place and
by a band) must concur. (U.S. v. Morada, et al., 23
Phil. 477)
The fact that the robbery with force upon things
in inhabited house or public building or edifice
devoted to religious worship was committed in an
uninhabited place and by a band must be alleged in
the information to qualify the offense.

198
The inhabited house, public building, or edifice
devoted to religious worship must be located in
an uninhabited place.
The robbery mentioned in Article 299, is
committed in an inhabited house, public building or
edifice devoted to religious worship. Such house,
building or edifice must be located in an uninhabited
place.
In the case of U.S. v. Morada, supra., it is said:
"In this case, it does not appear that the house
wherein the robbery was perpetrated was located in
an uninhabited place."

Distinction between the two classes of robbery as

to their being qualified.
Robbery with force upon things (Art. 299), in
order to be qualified, must be committed in an
uninhabited place and by a band (Art. 300); while
robbery with violence against or intimidation of
persons must be committed in an uninhabited place
or by a band. (Art. 295)

Art. 302. Robbery in an uninhabited place or

in a private building. – Any robbery committed in
an uninhabited place or in a building other than
those mentioned in the first paragraph of Article
299, if the value of the property taken exceeds
250 pesos shall be punished by prision
correccional in its medium and maximum
periods, provided that any of the following
circumstances is present:
1. If the entrance has been effected through
any opening not intended for entrance or egress;

199
 2. If any wall, roof, floor, or outside door or
window has been broken;
3. If the entrance has been effected through
the use of false keys, picklocks, or other similar
tools;
4. If any door, wardrobe, chest, or any
sealed or closed furniture or receptacle has been
broken;
5. If any closed or sealed receptacle, as
mentioned in the preceding paragraph, has been
removed, even if the same be broken open
elsewhere.
When the value of the property taken does
not exceed 250 pesos, the penalty next lower in
degree10 shall be imposed.
In the cases specified in Articles 294, 295, 297,
299, 300, and 302 of this Code, when the property
taken is mail matter or large cattle, the offender
shall suffer the penalties next higher in degree
than those provided in said articles. (AS amended
by C.A. No. 417)

Elements:
1. That the offender entered an uninhabited place
or a building was not a dwelling house, not a public
building, or not a devoted to religious worship.
2. That any of the following circumstances was
present:
a. The entrance was effected through an
opening not intended for entrance or
egress;
b. A wall, roof, floor, or outside door or
window was broken;

200
 c. The entrance was effected through the use of
false keys, picklocks or other similar tools;
d. A door, wardrobe, chest, or any sealed or
closed furniture or receptacle was
broken; or
e. A closed or sealed receptacle was removed,
even if the same be broken open elsewhere.
3. That with intent to gain, the offender took
therefrom personal property belonging to
another.

Art. 303. Robbery of cereals, fruits, or

firewood in an uninhabited place or private
building. – In the cases enumerated in Articles
299 and 302, when the robbery consists in the
taking of cereals, fruits, or firewood, the culprit
shall suffer the penalty next lower in degree than
that prescribed in said articles.

Cereals are seedlings which are the immediate

product of the soil.
The word "cereals" is not the correct translation
of the Spanish words "semilla alimenticia.”
“Semilla” means seedling which is the immediate
product of the soil. Hulled rice is not the immediate
and natural product of the soil.
Hence, the taking of sacks of hulled rice does
not fall under this article. but under the penultimate
paragraph of Article 302. (People v. Mesias, 65 Phil.
267)
Palay (the local name for unhulled rice) is
"cereal” and is included in the term "semilla
alimenticia” used in the Spanish text of the Revised
Penal Code, as it is grain in its original state and,
201
under proper conditions, can and will germinate into
the plant that produces it. The offense charged in the
case at bar, therefore, properly comes under Article
303 of the Revised Penal Code and within the
original jurisdiction of the Justice of the Peace
Court. (People v. Rada, et al., G.R. No. L-16988,
December 30, 1961, 3 SCRA 880)

The palay must be kept by the owner as

"seedling" or taken for that purpose by the
robbers.
Thus, taking 9 cavanes of palay, valued at P135,
from another's granary by breaking its wall, is
robbery as defined and penalized in Article 302, par.
2, and not in Article 303, inasmuch as the quantity
and value of the palay robbed are not insignificant
and there is no showing that the same was kept by
the owner as "seedling" or taken for that purpose by
the robbers. (People v. Taugan, CA-G.R. No. 1287-
R, May 26, 1949)

Art. 304. Possession of picklocks or similar

tools. – Any person who shall, without lawful
cause, have in his possession picklocks or similar
tools specially adopted to the commission of the
crime of robbery, shall be punished by arresto
mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon any
person who shall make such tools. If the offender
be a locksmith, he shall suffer the penalty of
prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods.

202
Elements of illegal possession of picklocks or
similar tools.
1. That the offender has in his possession picklocks
or similar tools.
2. That such picklocks or similar tools are
specially adopted to the commission of robbery.
3. That the offender does not have lawful cause for
such possession.

Actual use of picklocks or similar tools, not

necessary in illegal possession thereof.
It is not necessary that the picklocks or similar
tools are actually used to commit robbery.

Liability of a locksmith.
If the person who makes such tools is a
locksmith, the penalty is higher.
If he is not a locksmith, the penalty is the same
as that for a mere possessor.

Art. 305. False keys. – The term “false keys” shall

be deemed to include:
1. The tools mentioned in the next preceding
article;
2. Genuine keys stolen from the owner;
3. Any keys other than those intended by the
owner for use in the lock forcibly opened by the
offender.

Possession of false keys in paragraphs 2 and 3 of

Article 305, not punishable.
Would a person found in possession of genuine
key stolen from the owner be held criminally liable?
This article provides no penalty. It is clear that the
203
possession of the false keys mentioned in paragraphs
2 and 3 of Article 305 is not punishable.

Brigandage, defined.
Brigandage is a crime committed by more than
three armed persons who form a band of robbers for
the purpose of committing robbery in the highway or
kidnapping persons for the purpose of extortion or to
obtain ransom, or for any other purpose to be
attained by means of force and violence.
Art. 306. Who are brigands – Penalty. – When
more than three armed persons form a band of
robbers for the purpose of committing robbery in
the highway, or kidnapping persons for the
purpose of extortion or to obtain ransom or for
any other purpose to be attained by means of
force and violence, they shall be deemed highway
robbers or brigands.
Persons found guilty of this offense shall be
punished by prision mayor in its medium period
to reclusion temporal in its minimum period, if
the act or acts committed by them are not
punishable by higher penalties, in which case,
they shall suffer such high penalties.
If any of the arms carried by any of said
persons be an unlicensed firearm, it shall be
presumed that said persons are highway robbers
or brigands, and in case of conviction, the penalty
shall be imposed in the maximum period. (As
amended by R.A. No. 12)

There is brigandage when –

1. There be at least four armed persons.
2. They formed a band of robbers.
204
3. The purpose is any of the following:
a. To commit robbery in the highway; or
b. To kidnap persons for the purpose of
extortion or to obtain ransom; or c. To attain
by means of force and violence any other purpose.

Must be a band of robbers.

Article 306 mentions "bands of robbers” which
is formed by more than three armed persons.
Hence, a band of dissidents whose purpose is to
attain by means of force and violence, the
destruction of army installations, cannot be
convicted of brigandage. They do not form a band of
robbers.
Highway robbery/brigandage under Presidential
Decree No. 532.
Highway Robbery/Brigandage. – The seizure of
any person for ransom, extortion or other unlawful
purposes, or the taking away of the property of
another by means of violence against or intimidation
of persons or force upon things or other unlawful
means, committed by any person on any Philippine
Highway.
The penalty of reclusion temporal in its
minimum period shall be imposed. If physical
injuries or other crimes are committed during or on
the occasion of the commission of robbery or
brigandage, the penalty of reclusion temporal in its
medium and maximum periods shall be imposed. If
kidnapping for ransom or extortion, or murder or
homicide, or rape is committed as a result or on the
occasion thereof, the penalty of death shall be
imposed.

205
 Philippine Highway. – It shall refer to any road,
street, passage, highway and bridges or other parts
thereof, or railway or railroad within the Philippines
used by persons, or vehicles, or locomotives or trains
for the movement or circulation of persons or
transportation of goods, articles, or property or both.
Note:
Any person who aids or protects highway robbers
or abets the commission of highway robbery or
brigandage shall be considered as an accomplice.
Theft, defined.
Theft is committed by any person who, with
intent to gain but without violence against or
intimidation of persons nor force upon things, shall
take personal property of another without the latter's
consent.

Art. 308. Who are liable for theft. – Theft is

committed by any person who, with intent to gain
but without violence against, or intimidation of
persons nor force upon things, shall take personal
property of another without the latter's consent.
Theft is likewise committed by:
1. Any person who, having found lost
property, shall fail to deliver the same to the
local authorities or to its owner;
2. Any person who, after having maliciously
damaged the property of another, shall
remove or make use of the fruits or object of
the damage caused by him; and
3. Any person who shall enter an inclosed
estate or a field where trespass is forbidden
or which belongs to another and without the
206
 consent of its owner, shall hunt or fish upon
the same or shall gather fruits, cereals, or
other forest or farm products.

The following are liable for theft:

1. Those who, (a) with intent to gain, (b) but
without violence against or intimidation of persons
nor force upon things, (c) take, (d) personal
property, (e) of another, (f) without the latter's
consent.
2. Those who, (a) having found lost property, (b)
fail to deliver the same to the local authorities or
to its owner.
3. Those who, (a) after having maliciously
damaged the property of another, (b) remove or
make use of the fruits or object of the damage caused
by them.
4. Those who (a) enter an inclosed estate or a field
where (b) trespass is forbidden or which belongs
to another and, without the consent of its owner, (c)
hunt or fish upon the same or gather fruits, cereals or
other forest or farm products.

Elements of theft:
1. That there be taking of personal property.
2. That said property belongs to another.
3. That the taking be done with intent to gain.
4. That the taking be done without the consent of
the owner.
5. That the taking be accomplished without the use
of violence against or intimidation of persons or
force upon things. (U.S. v. De Vera, 43 Phil. 1000;
People v. Yusay, 50 Phil. 598)

207
 Note: In the case of U.S. v. De Vera, supra, the
phrase "taking away” is used in stating one of the
elements of theft. But in the case of People v. Yusay,
supra, citing Viada, the word "away” is not used in
connection with the taking of personal property.

Theft, distinguished from robbery.

What distinguishes theft from robbery is that in
theft, the offender does not use violence or
intimidation or does not enter a house or building
through any of the means specified in Article 299 or
Article 302 in taking personal property of another
with intent to gain.
Note:
1.THERE IS NO CRIME OF FRUSTRATED
THEFT
2.If there is no taking of personal property, the
crime of theft is not committed.
Personal property.
Personal property as an element of theft includes
electricity and gas because electricity, the same as
gas, is a valuable article of merchandise bought and
sold like other personal property and is capable of
appropriation by another. (U.S. v. Carlos, 21 Phil.
553; U.S. v. Tambunting, 41 Phil. 364)
Finder of lost property (Paragraph No. 1, Art.
308).
Perez, who had in his possession the sum of
P150 in paper money; hurried to the ticket window
of a railroad station, at the same time drawing out
from his watch-pocket P2.00 to buy a ticket.
Unnoticed by him, the bundle of money bills
dropped at his feet. The accused, a woman, who was
208
passing by at that moment, picked up the bundle of
bills, and, hastily concealing said bundle, moved on
up the platform. After Perez had returned from the
ticket window, the accused approached him and
handed P30 in bills, saying that was the money he
had dropped. She kept the rest of the money.
Held: The accused is guilty of theft as a finder of
lost property who retained part of it with intent to
gain. (U.S. v. Santiago, 27 Phil. 483)

How to prove this kind of theft.

It is necessary to prove:
(1) The time of the seizure of the thing;
(2) That it was a lost property belonging to
another; and
(3) That the accused having had the opportunity
to return or deliver the lost property to its
owner or to the local authorities, refrained from
doing so. (People v. Jerusalem, C.A., 43 O.G.
1253)

Delay in the delivery of lost property to the local

authorities is immaterial, when the finder
surrendered it voluntarily to the owner when the
latter came to his house to get it.

The law does not require knowledge of the owner

of the lost property.
Due to a strong typhoon, a wooden chest
containing money, jewelry, clothing and other
personal property, was washed away by the flood. It
was found by the accused. He took its contents.
Held: As long as the accused knew or had reason
to know that the property was lost, it was his duty to
209
turn it over to the authorities, regardless of whether
or not he knew who was the owner of the lost
property. The Revised Penal Code does not require
knowledge of the owner of the lost property.
(People v. Panotes, et al., C.A., 36 O.G. 1008;
People v. Silverio, C.A., 43 O.G. 2205)
Finder of hidden treasure who misappropriated
the share pertaining to the owner of the property
is guilty of theft as regards that share.
The finder of hidden treasure on the property of
another and by chance is entitled to one-half thereof.
(Arts. 438 and 439, C.C.) If he misappropriated the
other half pertaining to the owner of the property on
which the hidden treasure was found, he is liable for
theft as to that share. (People v. Longdew, CA-G.R.
No. 9380-R, June 4, 1953)

Removing or making use of fruits or object of

property maliciously damaged (Paragraph No. 2,
Art. 308).
A defendant who shot, killed and slaughtered the
cattle of another, which had destroyed defendant's
plantation, and distributed the meat among himself
and his neighbors, is guilty of simple theft. (People
v. Morillo, 40 O.G., Supp. 4, 107)

Art. 309. Penalties. – Any person guilty of

theft shall be punished by:
1. The penalty of prision mayor in its
minimum and medium periods, if the value of the
thing stolen is more than 12,000 pesos but does
not exceed 22,000 pesos; but if the value of the
thing stolen exceeds the latter amount, the
penalty shall be the maximum period of the one
210
prescribed in this paragraph and one year of
each additional ten thousand pesos, but the total
of the penalty which may be imposed shall not
exceed twenty years. In such cases, and in
connection with the accessory penalties which
may be imposed and for the purpose of the other
provisions of this Code, the penalty shall be
termed prision mayor or reclusion temporal, as the
case may be.
2. The penalty of prision correccional in its
medium and maximum periods, if the value of the
property stolen is more than 6,000 pesos but does
not exceed 12,000 pesos.
3. The penalty of prision correccional in its
minimum and medium periods, if the value of the
property stolen is more than 200 pesos but does
not exceed 6,000 pesos.
4. Arresto mayor in its medium period to
prision correccional in its minimum period, if the
value of the property stolen is over 50 pesos but
does not exceed 200 pesos.
5. Arresto mayor in its full extent, if such
value is over 5 pesos but does not exceed 50 pesos.
6. Arresto mayor in its minimum and
medium periods, if such value does not exceed
five pesos.
7. Arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200
pesos, if the theft is committed under the
circumstances enumerated in paragraph 3 of the
next preceding article and the value of the thing
stolen does not exceed 5 pesos. If such value
exceeds said amount, the provisions of any of the
five preceding subdivisions shall be made
applicable.
211
 8. Arresto menor in its minimum period or a
fine not exceeding 50 pesos, when the value of the
thing stolen is not over 5 pesos, and the offender
shall have acted under the

ARSON AND OTHER CRIMES INVOLVING

DESTRUCTIONS

Art. 320. Destructive arson. — The penalty of

reclusion temporal in its maximum period to
reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon any person
who shall burn:
1. Any arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or military
powder or fireworks factory, ordinance,
storehouse, archives or general museum of the
Government.chanrobles virtual law library
2. Any passenger train or motor vehicle in motion
or vessel out of port.chanrobles virtual law
library
3. In an inhabited place, any storehouse or
factory of inflammable or explosive
materials.chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 321. Other forms of arson. — When the arson
consists in the burning of other property and under
the circumstances given hereunder, the offender
shall be punishable:
1. By reclusion temporal or reclusion perpetua:
(a) if the offender shall set fire to any building,
farmhouse, warehouse, hut, shelter, or vessel in
port, knowing it to be occupied at the time by one
or more persons;
212
(b) If the building burned is a public building and
value of the damage caused exceeds 6,000 pesos;
(c) If the building burned is a public building and
the purpose is to destroy evidence kept therein to
be used in instituting prosecution for the
punishment of violators of the law, irrespective of
the amount of the damage; chan robles virtual
law library
(d) If the building burned is a public building and
the purpose is to destroy evidence kept therein to
be used in legislative, judicial or administrative
proceedings, irrespective of the amount of the
damage; Provided, however, That if the evidence
destroyed is to be used against the defendant for
the prosecution of any crime punishable under
existing laws, the penalty shall be reclusion
perpetua;
(e) If the arson shall have been committed with
the intention of collecting under an insurance
policy against loss or damage by fire.chanrobles
virtual law library
2. By reclusion temporal:

(a) If an inhabited house or any other building in

which people are accustomed to meet is set on
fire, and the culprit did not know that such house
or building was occupied at the time, or if he shall
set fire to a moving freight train or motor vehicle,
and the value of the damage caused exceeds 6,000
pesos;
(b) If the value of the damage caused in
paragraph (b) of the preceding subdivision does
not exceed 6,000 pesos;

213
(c) If a farm, sugar mill, cane mill, mill central,
bamboo groves or any similar plantation is set on
fire and the damage caused exceeds 6,000 pesos;
and
(d) If grain fields, pasture lands, or forests, or
plantings are set on fire, and the damage caused
exceeds 6,000 pesos.chanrobles virtual law
library
3. By prision mayor:

(a) If the value of the damage caused in the case

mentioned in paragraphs (a), (c), and (d) in the
next preceding subdivision does not exceed 6,000
pesos;
(b) If a building not used as a dwelling or place of
assembly, located in a populated place, is set on
fire, and the damage caused exceeds 6,000 pesos;
4. By prision correccional in its maximum period
to prision mayor in its medium period:

(a) If a building used as dwelling located in an

uninhabited place is set on fire and the damage
caused exceeds 1,000 pesos;
(b) If the value or the damage caused in the case
mentioned in paragraphs (c) and (d) of
subdivision 2 of this article does not exceed 200
pesos.chanrobles virtual law library
5. By prision correccional in its medium period to
prision mayor in its minimum period, when the
damage caused is over 200 pesos but does not
exceed 1,000 pesos, and the property referred to
in paragraph (a) of the preceding subdivision is
set on fire; but when the value of such property
does not exceed 200 pesos, the penalty next lower
214
in degree than that prescribed in this subdivision
shall be imposed.chanrobles virtual law library
6. The penalty of prision correccional in its
medium and maximum periods, if the damage
caused in the case mentioned in paragraph (b) of
subdivision 3 of this article does not exceed 6,000
pesos but is over 200 pesos.chanrobles virtual law
library
7. The penalty of prision correccional in its
minimum and medium periods, if the damage
caused in the case mentioned paragraph (b)
subdivision 3 of this article does not exceed 200
pesos.chanrobles virtual law library
8. The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine
ranging from fifty to one hundred per centum if
the damage caused shall be imposed, when the
property burned consists of grain fields, pasture
lands, forests, or plantations when the value of
such property does not exceed 200 pesos. (As
amended by R.A. 5467, approved May 12, 1969).
Art. 322. Cases of arson not included in the
preceding articles. — Cases of arson not included in
the next preceding articles shall be punished:
1. By arresto mayor in its medium and maximum
periods, when the damage caused does not exceed
50 pesos;
2. By arresto mayor in its maximum period to
prision correccional in its minimum period, when
the damage caused is over 50 pesos but does not
exceed 200 pesos;
3. By prision correccional in its minimum and
medium periods, if the damage caused is over 200
pesos but does not exceed 1,000 pesos; and

215
4. By prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods, if it is over 1,000
pesos.chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 323. Arson of property of small value. — The
arson of any uninhabited hut, storehouse, barn, shed,
or any other property the value of which does not
exceed 25 pesos, committed at a time or under
circumstances which clearly exclude all danger of
the fire spreading, shall not be punished by the
penalties respectively prescribed in this chapter, but
in accordance with the damage caused and under the
provisions of the following chapter.
Art. 324. Crimes involving destruction. — Any
person who shall cause destruction by means of
explosion, discharge of electric current,
inundation, sinking or stranding of a vessel,
intentional damaging of the engine of said vessel,
taking up the rails from a railway track,
maliciously changing railway signals for the
safety of moving trains, destroying telegraph
wires and telegraph posts, or those of any other
system, and, in general, by using any other
agency or means of destruction as effective as
those above enumerated, shall be punished by
reclusion temporal if the commission has
endangered the safety of any person, otherwise,
the penalty of prision mayor shall be
imposed.chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 325. Burning one's own property as means to
commit arson. — Any person guilty of arson or
causing great destruction of the property
belonging to another shall suffer the penalties
prescribed in this chapter, even though he shall
have set fire to or destroyed his own property for
216
the purposes of committing the crime.chanrobles
virtual law library
Art. 326. Setting fire to property exclusively owned
by the offender. — If the property burned shall be
the exclusive property of the offender, he shall be
punished by arresto mayor in its maximum
period to prision correccional in its minimum
period, if the arson shall have been committed for
the purpose of defrauding or causing damage to
another, or prejudice shall actually have been
caused, or if the thing burned shall have been a
building in an inhabited place.chanrobles virtual
law library
Art. 326-A. In cases where death resulted as a
consequence of arson. — If death resulted as a
consequence of arson committed on any of the
properties and under any of the circumstances
mentioned in the preceding articles, the court
shall impose the death penalty.chanrobles virtual
law library
Art. 326-B. Prima facie evidence of arson. — Any
of the following circumstances shall constitute
prima facie evidence of arson:
1. If after the fire, are found materials or
substances soaked in gasoline, kerosene,
petroleum, or other inflammables, or any
mechanical, electrical chemical or traces or any
of the foregoing.chanrobles virtual law library
2. That substantial amount of inflammable
substance or materials were stored within the
building not necessary in the course of the
defendant's business; and
3. That the fire started simultaneously in more
than one part of the building or locale under
217
circumstances that cannot normally be due to
accidental or unintentional causes: Provided,
however, That at least one of the following is
present in any of the three above-mentioned
circumstances:

(a) That the total insurance carried on the

building and/or goods is more than 80 per cent of
the value of such building and/or goods at the
time of the fire;
(b) That the defendant after the fire has
presented a fraudulent claim for loss.chanrobles
virtual law library
The penalty of prision correccional shall be imposed
on one who plants the articles above-mentioned, in
order to secure a conviction, or as a means of
extortion or coercion. (As amended by R.A. 5467,
approved May 12, 1969).
[click here for the full text of
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 1613
AMENDING THE LAW ON ARSON]
[Click here for the full text of
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 1744
AMENDING ARTICLE THREE HUNDRED
AND TWENTY OF
THE REVISED PENAL CODE PROVISIONS
ON ARSON]
Chapter Nine
MALICIOUS MISCHIEF

Art. 327. Who are liable for malicious mischief. —

Any person who shall deliberately cause the
property of another any damage not falling within

218
the terms of the next preceding chapter shall be
guilty of malicious mischief.
Art. 328. Special cases of malicious mischief. —
Any person who shall cause damage to obstruct
the performance of public functions, or using any
poisonous or corrosive substance; or spreading
any infection or contagion among cattle; or who
cause damage to the property of the National
Museum or National Library, or to any archive
or registry, waterworks, road, promenade, or any
other thing used in common by the public, shall
be punished:
1. By prision correccional in its minimum and
medium periods, if the value of the damage
caused exceeds 1,000 pesos;
2. By arresto mayor, if such value does not exceed
the abovementioned amount but it is over 200
pesos; and
3. By arresto menor, in such value does not
exceed 200 pesos.chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 329. Other mischiefs. — The mischiefs not
included in the next preceding article shall be
punished:
1. By arresto mayor in its medium and maximum
periods, if the value of the damage caused exceeds
1,000 pesos;
2. By arresto mayor in its minimum and medium
periods, if such value is over 200 pesos but does
not exceed 1,000 pesos; and
3. By arresto menor or fine of not less than the
value of the damage caused and not more than
200 pesos, if the amount involved does not exceed
200 pesos or cannot be estimated.chanrobles
virtual law library
219
Art. 330. Damage and obstruction to means of
communication. — The penalty of prision
correccional in its medium and maximum periods
shall be imposed upon any person who shall damage
any railway, telegraph or telephone lines.
If the damage shall result in any derailment of
cars, collision or other accident, the penalty of
prision mayor shall be imposed, without
prejudice to the criminal liability of the offender
for the other consequences of his criminal
act.chanrobles virtual law library
For the purpose of the provisions of the article,
the electric wires, traction cables, signal system
and other things pertaining to railways, shall be
deemed to constitute an integral part of a railway
system.chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 331. Destroying or damaging statues, public
monuments or paintings. — Any person who shall
destroy or damage statues or any other useful or
ornamental public monument shall suffer the
penalty of arresto mayor in its medium period to
prision correccional in its minimum
period.chanrobles virtual law library
Any person who shall destroy or damage any
useful or ornamental painting of a public nature
shall suffer the penalty of arresto menor or a fine
not exceeding 200 pesos, or both such fine and
imprisonment, in the discretion of the
court.chanrobles virtual law library
Chapter Ten
EXEMPTION FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY
IN CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY

Art. 332. Persons exempt from criminal liability. —

220
No criminal, but only civil liability, shall result from
the commission of the crime of theft, swindling or
malicious mischief committed or caused mutually by
the following persons:
1. Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or
relatives by affinity in the same line.chanrobles
virtual law library
2. The widowed spouse with respect to the
property which belonged to the deceased spouse
before the same shall have passed into the
possession of another; and
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and
sisters-in-law, if living together.chanrobles
virtual law library
The exemption established by this article shall not be
applicable to strangers participating in the
commission of the crime.
Title Eleven
CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY
Chapter One
ADULTERY AND CONCUBINAGE

Art. 333. Who are guilty of adultery. — Adultery is

committed by any married woman who shall have
sexual intercourse with a man not her husband and
by the man who has carnal knowledge of her
knowing her to be married, even if the marriage be
subsequently declared void.
Adultery shall be punished by prision
correccional in its medium and maximum
periods.chanrobles virtual law library
If the person guilty of adultery committed this
offense while being abandoned without
justification by the offended spouse, the penalty
221
next lower in degree than that provided in the
next preceding paragraph shall be
imposed.chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 334. Concubinage. — Any husband who
shall keep a mistress in the conjugal dwelling, or
shall have sexual intercourse, under scandalous
circumstances, with a woman who is not his wife,
or shall cohabit with her in any other place, shall
be punished by prision correccional in its
minimum and medium periods.chanrobles virtual
law library
The concubine shall suffer the penalty of
destierro.chanrobles virtual law library
Chapter Two
RAPE AND ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS

Art. 335. When and how rape is committed. — Rape

is committed by having carnal knowledge of a
woman under any of the following circumstances:
1. By using force or intimidation;
2. When the woman is deprived of reason or
otherwise unconscious; and
3. When the woman is under twelve years of age,
even though neither of the circumstances
mentioned in the two next preceding paragraphs
shall be present.chanrobles virtual law library
The crime of rape shall be punished by reclusion
perpetua.
Whenever the crime of rape is committed with
the use of a deadly weapon or by two or more
persons, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua
to death.chanrobles virtual law library

222
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape,
the victim has become insane, the penalty shall be
death.chanrobles virtual law library
When rape is attempted or frustrated and a
homicide is committed by reason or on the
occasion thereof, the penalty shall be likewise
death.chanrobles virtual law library
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, a
homicide is committed, the penalty shall be
death. (As amended by R.A. 2632, approved June
18, 1960, and R.A. 4111, approved June 20, 1964).
Art. 336. Acts of lasciviousness. — Any person
who shall commit any act of lasciviousness upon
other persons of either sex, under any of the
circumstances mentioned in the preceding article,
shall be punished by prision
correccional.chanrobles virtual law library
Chapter Three
SEDUCTION, CORRUPTION OF MINORS
AND WHITE SLAVE TRADE

Art. 337. Qualified seduction. — The seduction of a

virgin over twelve years and under eighteen years of
age, committed by any person in public authority,
priest, home-servant, domestic, guardian, teacher, or
any person who, in any capacity, shall be entrusted
with the education or custody of the woman
seduced, shall be punished by prision correccional in
its minimum and medium periods.
The penalty next higher in degree shall be
imposed upon any person who shall seduce his
sister or descendant, whether or not she be a
virgin or over eighteen years of age.chanrobles
virtual law library
223
Under the provisions of this Chapter, seduction is
committed when the offender has carnal
knowledge of any of the persons and under the
circumstances described herein.chanrobles
virtual law library
Art. 338. Simple seduction. — The seduction of a
woman who is single or a widow of good
reputation, over twelve but under eighteen years
of age, committed by means of deceit, shall be
punished by arresto mayor.chanrobles virtual
law library
Art. 339. Acts of lasciviousness with the consent of
the offended party. — The penalty of arresto
mayor shall be imposed to punish any other acts
of lasciviousness committed by the same persons
and the same circumstances as those provided in
Articles 337 and 338.chanrobles virtual law
library chan robles virtual law library
Art. 340. Corruption of minors. — Any person
who shall promote or facilitate the prostitution or
corruption of persons underage to satisfy the lust
of another, shall be punished by prision mayor,
and if the culprit is a pubic officer or employee,
including those in government-owned or
controlled corporations, he shall also suffer the
penalty of temporary absolute
disqualification. (As amended by Batas
Pambansa Blg. 92).
Art. 341. White slave trade. — The penalty of
prision mayor in its medium and maximum
period shall be imposed upon any person who, in
any manner, or under any pretext, shall engage
in the business or shall profit by prostitution or
shall enlist the services of any other for the
224
purpose of prostitution (As amended by Batas
Pambansa Blg. 186.)
Chapter Four
ABDUCTION

Art. 342. Forcible abduction. — The abduction of

any woman against her will and with lewd designs
shall be punished by reclusion temporal.
The same penalty shall be imposed in every case,
if the female abducted be under twelve years of
age.chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 343. Consented abduction. — The abduction
of a virgin over twelve years and under eighteen
years of age, carried out with her consent and
with lewd designs, shall be punished by the
penalty of prision correccional in its minimum
and medium periods.chanrobles virtual law
library
Chapter Five
PROVISIONS RELATIVE TO THE
PRECEDING
CHAPTERS OF TITLE ELEVEN

Art. 344. Prosecution of the crimes of adultery,

concubinage, seduction, abduction, rape and acts of
lasciviousness. — The crimes of adultery and
concubinage shall not be prosecuted except upon a
complaint filed by the offended spouse.
The offended party cannot institute criminal
prosecution without including both the guilty
parties, if they are both alive, nor, in any case, if
he shall have consented or pardoned the
offenders.chanrobles virtual law library

225
The offenses of seduction, abduction, rape or acts
of lasciviousness, shall not be prosecuted except
upon a complaint filed by the offended party or
her parents, grandparents, or guardian, nor, in
any case, if the offender has been expressly
pardoned by the above named persons, as the
case may be.chanrobles virtual law library
In cases of seduction, abduction, acts of
lasciviousness and rape, the marriage of the
offender with the offended party shall extinguish
the criminal action or remit the penalty already
imposed upon him. The provisions of this
paragraph shall also be applicable to the co-
principals, accomplices and accessories after the
fact of the above-mentioned crimes.chanrobles
virtual law library
Art. 345. Civil liability of persons guilty of crimes
against chastity. — Person guilty of rape,
seduction or abduction, shall also be sentenced:
1. To indemnify the offended woman.chanrobles
virtual law library
2. To acknowledge the offspring, unless the law
should prevent him from so doing.chanrobles
virtual law library
3. In every case to support the
offspring.chanrobles virtual law library
The adulterer and the concubine in the case provided
for in Articles 333 and 334 may also be sentenced,
in the same proceeding or in a separate civil
proceeding, to indemnify for damages caused to the
offended spouse.
Art. 346. Liability of ascendants, guardians,
teachers, or other persons entrusted with the
custody of the offended party. — The ascendants,
226
guardians, curators, teachers and any person
who, by abuse of authority or confidential
relationships, shall cooperate as accomplices in
the perpetration of the crimes embraced in
chapters, second, third and fourth, of this title,
shall be punished as principals.chanrobles virtual
law library chan robles virtual law library
Teachers or other persons in any other capacity
entrusted with the education and guidance of
youth, shall also suffer the penalty of temporary
special disqualification in its maximum period to
perpetual special disqualification.chanrobles
virtual law library
Any person falling within the terms of this article,
and any other person guilty of corruption of
minors for the benefit of another, shall be
punished by special disqualification from filling
the office of guardian.chanrobles virtual law
library
Title Twelve
CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL STATUS OF
PERSONS
Chapter one
SIMULATION OF BIRTHS AND
USURPATION OF CIVIL STATUS
Art. 347. Simulation of births, substitution of one
child for another and concealment or
abandonment of a legitimate child. — The
simulation of births and the substitution of one
child for another shall be punished by prision
mayor and a fine of not exceeding 1,000
pesos.chanrobles virtual law library
The same penalties shall be imposed upon any
person who shall conceal or abandon any
227
legitimate child with intent to cause such child to
lose its civil status.chanrobles virtual law library
Any physician or surgeon or public officer who,
in violation of the duties of his profession or
office, shall cooperate in the execution of any of
the crimes mentioned in the two next preceding
paragraphs, shall suffer the penalties therein
prescribed and also the penalty of temporary
special disqualification.chanrobles virtual law
library
Art. 348. Usurpation of civil status. — The penalty
of prision mayor shall be imposed upon any
person who shall usurp the civil status of another,
should he do so for the purpose of defrauding the
offended part or his heirs; otherwise, the penalty
of prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods shall be imposed.chanrobles
virtual law library
Chapter Two
ILLEGAL MARRIAGES

Art. 349. Bigamy. — The penalty of prision mayor

shall be imposed upon any person who shall contract
a second or subsequent marriage before the former
marriage has been legally dissolved, or before the
absent spouse has been declared presumptively dead
by means of a judgment rendered in the proper
proceedings.
Art. 350. Marriage contracted against provisions
of laws. — The penalty of prision correccional in
its medium and maximum periods shall be
imposed upon any person who, without being
included in the provisions of the next proceeding
article, shall have not been complied with or that
228
the marriage is in disregard of a legal
impediment.chanrobles virtual law library
If either of the contracting parties shall obtain
the consent of the other by means of violence,
intimidation or fraud, he shall be punished by the
maximum period of the penalty provided in the
next preceding paragraph.chanrobles virtual law
library
Art. 351. Premature marriages. — Any widow
who shall marry within three hundred and one
day from the date of the death of her husband, or
before having delivered if she shall have been
pregnant at the time of his death, shall be
punished by arresto mayor and a fine not
exceeding 500 pesos.chanrobles virtual law
library
The same penalties shall be imposed upon any
woman whose marriage shall have been annulled
or dissolved, if she shall marry before her
delivery or before the expiration of the period of
three hundred and one day after the legal
separation.chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 352. Performance of illegal marriage
ceremony. — Priests or ministers of any religious
denomination or sect, or civil authorities who
shall perform or authorize any illegal marriage
ceremony shall be punished in accordance with
the provisions of the Marriage Law.chanrobles
virtual law library
Title Thirteen
CRIMES AGAINST HONOR
Chapter One
LIBEL

229
 Section One. — Definitions, forms, and
punishment of this crime.chanrobles virtual law
library

Art. 353. Definition of libel. — A libel is public and

malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or
defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission,
condition, status, or circumstance tending to cause
the dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or
juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one
who is dead.
Art. 354. Requirement for publicity. — Every
defamatory imputation is presumed to be
malicious, even if it be true, if no good intention
and justifiable motive for making it is shown,
except in the following cases:
1. A private communication made by any person
to another in the performance of any legal, moral
or social duty; and
2. A fair and true report, made in good faith,
without any comments or remarks, of any
judicial, legislative or other official proceedings
which are not of confidential nature, or of any
statement, report or speech delivered in said
proceedings, or of any other act performed by
public officers in the exercise of their
functions.chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 355. Libel means by writings or similar
means. — A libel committed by means of writing,
printing, lithography, engraving, radio, phonograph,
painting, theatrical exhibition, cinematographic
exhibition, or any similar means, shall be punished
by prision correccional in its minimum and medium
periods or a fine ranging from 200 to 6,000 pesos, or
230
both, in addition to the civil action which may be
brought by the offended party.
Art. 356. Threatening to publish and offer to
present such publication for a compensation. —
The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine from 200
to 2,000 pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon
any person who threatens another to publish a
libel concerning him or the parents, spouse, child,
or other members of the family of the latter or
upon anyone who shall offer to prevent the
publication of such libel for a compensation or
money consideration.chanrobles virtual law
library
Art. 357. Prohibited publication of acts referred to
in the course of official proceedings. — The
penalty of arresto mayor or a fine of from 20 to
2,000 pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any
reporter, editor or manager or a newspaper,
daily or magazine, who shall publish facts
connected with the private life of another and
offensive to the honor, virtue and reputation of
said person, even though said publication be
made in connection with or under the pretext
that it is necessary in the narration of any judicial
or administrative proceedings wherein such facts
have been mentioned.chanrobles virtual law
library
Art. 358. Slander. — Oral defamation shall be
punished by arresto mayor in its maximum
period to prision correccional in its minimum
period if it is of a serious and insulting nature;
otherwise the penalty shall be arresto menor or a
fine not exceeding 200 pesos.chanrobles virtual
law library
231
Art. 359. Slander by deed. — The penalty of
arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period or a fine
ranging from 200 to 1,000 pesos shall be imposed
upon any person who shall perform any act not
included and punished in this title, which shall
cast dishonor, discredit or contempt upon
another person. If said act is not of a serious
nature, the penalty shall be arresto menor or a
fine not exceeding 200 pesos.chanrobles virtual
law library
Section Two. — General provisions

Art. 360. Persons responsible. — Any person who

shall publish, exhibit, or cause the publication or
exhibition of any defamation in writing or by similar
means, shall be responsible for the same.
The author or editor of a book or pamphlet, or
the editor or business manager of a daily
newspaper, magazine or serial publication, shall
be responsible for the defamations contained
therein to the same extent as if he were the author
thereof.chanrobles virtual law library
The criminal and civil action for damages in
cases of written defamations as provided for in
this chapter, shall be filed simultaneously or
separately with the court of first instance of the
province or city where the libelous article is
printed and first published or where any of the
offended parties actually resides at the time of the
commission of the offense: Provided, however,
That where one of the offended parties is a public
officer whose office is in the City of Manila at the
time of the commission of the offense, the action
232
shall be filed in the Court of First Instance of the
City of Manila, or of the city or province where
the libelous article is printed and first published,
and in case such public officer does not hold
office in the City of Manila, the action shall be
filed in the Court of First Instance of the province
or city where he held office at the time of the
commission of the offense or where the libelous
article is printed and first published and in case
one of the offended parties is a private individual,
the action shall be filed in the Court of First
Instance of the province or city where he actually
resides at the time of the commission of the
offense or where the libelous matter is printed
and first published: Provided, further, That the
civil action shall be filed in the same court where
the criminal action is filed and vice
versa: Provided, furthermore, That the court
where the criminal action or civil action for
damages is first filed, shall acquire jurisdiction to
the exclusion of other courts: And, provided,
finally, That this amendment shall not apply to
cases of written defamations, the civil and/or
criminal actions which have been filed in court at
the time of the effectivity of this law.chanrobles
virtual law library
Preliminary investigation of criminal action for
written defamations as provided for in the
chapter shall be conducted by the provincial or
city fiscal of the province or city, or by the
municipal court of the city or capital of the
province where such action may be instituted in
accordance with the provisions of this
article.chanrobles virtual law library
233
No criminal action for defamation which consists
in the imputation of a crime which cannot be
prosecuted de oficio shall be brought except at
the instance of and upon complaint expressly
filed by the offended party. (As amended by R.A.
1289, approved June 15, 1955, R.A. 4363,
approved June 19, 1965).

Art. 361. Proof of the truth. — In every criminal

prosecution for libel, the truth may be given in
evidence to the court and if it appears that the
matter charged as libelous is true, and, moreover,
that it was published with good motives and for
justifiable ends, the defendants shall be
acquitted.chanrobles virtual law library
Proof of the truth of an imputation of an act or
omission not constituting a crime shall not be
admitted, unless the imputation shall have been
made against Government employees with
respect to facts related to the discharge of their
official duties.chanrobles virtual law library
In such cases if the defendant proves the truth of
the imputation made by him, he shall be
acquitted.chanrobles virtual law library
Art. 362. Libelous remarks. — Libelous remarks
or comments connected with the matter
privileged under the provisions of Article 354, if
made with malice, shall not exempt the author
thereof nor the editor or managing editor of a
newspaper from criminal liability.chanrobles
virtual law library
Chapter Two
INCRIMINATORY MACHINATIONS

234
Art. 363. Incriminating innocent person. — Any
person who, by any act not constituting perjury, shall
directly incriminate or impute to an innocent person
the commission of a crime, shall be punished by
arresto menor.
Art. 364. Intriguing against honor. — The penalty
of arresto menor or fine not exceeding 200 pesos
shall be imposed for any intrigue which has for
its principal purpose to blemish the honor or
reputation of a person.chanrobles virtual law
library
Title Fourteen
QUASI-OFFENSES
Sole Chapter
CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE

Art. 365. Imprudence and negligence. — Any

person who, by reckless imprudence, shall commit
any act which, had it been intentional, would
constitute a grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of
arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its medium period; if it would have
constituted a less grave felony, the penalty of arresto
mayor in its minimum and medium periods shall be
imposed; if it would have constituted a light felony,
the penalty of arresto menor in its maximum period
shall be imposed.
Any person who, by simple imprudence or
negligence, shall commit an act which would
otherwise constitute a grave felony, shall suffer
the penalty of arresto mayor in its medium and
maximum periods; if it would have constituted a
less serious felony, the penalty of arresto mayor
235
in its minimum period shall be
imposed.chanrobles virtual law library
When the execution of the act covered by this
article shall have only resulted in damage to the
property of another, the offender shall be
punished by a fine ranging from an amount equal
to the value of said damages to three times such
value, but which shall in no case be less than
twenty-five pesos.chanrobles virtual law library
A fine not exceeding two hundred pesos and
censure shall be imposed upon any person who,
by simple imprudence or negligence, shall cause
some wrong which, if done maliciously, would
have constituted a light felony.chanrobles virtual
law library
In the imposition of these penalties, the court
shall exercise their sound discretion, without
regard to the rules prescribed in Article sixty-
four.chanrobles virtual law library
The provisions contained in this article shall not
be applicable:
1. When the penalty provided for the offense is
equal to or lower than those provided in the first
two paragraphs of this article, in which case the
court shall impose the penalty next lower in
degree than that which should be imposed in the
period which they may deem proper to
apply.chanrobles virtual law library
2. When, by imprudence or negligence and with
violation of the Automobile Law, to death of a
person shall be caused, in which case the
defendant shall be punished by prision
correccional in its medium and maximum
periods.chanrobles virtual law library
236
Reckless imprudence consists in voluntary, but
without malice, doing or falling to do an act from
which material damage results by reason of
inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the
person performing of failing to perform such act,
taking into consideration his employment or
occupation, degree of intelligence, physical
condition and other circumstances regarding
persons, time and place.
Simple imprudence consists in the lack of
precaution displayed in those cases in which the
damage impending to be caused is not immediate
nor the danger clearly manifest.chanrobles
virtual law library
The penalty next higher in degree to those
provided for in this article shall be imposed upon
the offender who fails to lend on the spot to the
injured parties such help as may be in this hand
to give. (As amended by R.A. 1790, approved
June 21, 1957).

237