Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1983 > July 1983 Decisions > G.R. No. L-45946 July 5, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FRANCISCO BERNAT

208 Phil. 252:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-45946. July 5, 1983.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FRANCISCO BERNAT alias BOY, Accused-Appellant.

The Solicitor General for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Paulino G. Clarin for Accused-Appellant.


SYLLABUS


1. REMEDIAL LAW: EVIDENCE; CREDIBILITY OF WITNESS; UNCORROBORATED TESTIMONY TO WARRANT A CONVICTION MUST BE CONVINCING AND FREE FROM CONTRADICTIONS. — The crime of rape, by its very nature, usually involves only two persons, the offended party and the accused. As a consequence, the court in rendering judgment must rely almost entirely on the credibility of the complainant’s allegations. While the uncorroborated testimony of the complainant may he sufficient under certain circumstances to warrant a conviction, nevertheless, for this rule to obtain such testimony must he convincing and free from any contradiction. It should not be accepted unless her sincerity and candor are free from suspicion.

2. ID.; ID.; ID.; ALLEGED PHYSICAL INJURIES CONTRARY TO THE ADMITTED PHYSICAL FACTS; CASE AT BAR. — Complainant alleged that on two occasions appellant had dragged her on the ground to a but and that inside the but, he threw her to the floor with great force. Considered in the light of the testimony of Dr. Soledad Liao, who examined complainant four days after the incident, the aforesaid claim appears inherently improbable. It bear emphasis that Dr. Liao did not find any abrasion, contusion, laceration or any other external or internal injury on the body of the complainant. Neither did the doctor find any injury in the latter’s genitalia. Tested against such findings, the Supreme Court rejects the complainant’s claim that she had been subjected to physical violence, the same belong contrary to the admitted physical facts of the case. Indeed, it is inconceivable that she had managed to remain unscathed after having been dragged on the ground and forcibly thrown on the floor.

3. ID.; ID.; DEMEANOR AND CONDUCT OF COMPLAINANT WITNESS DURING PHYSICAL EXAMINATION DOES NOT GIVE CREDENCE TO THE RAPE CHARGE. — Equally significant it Dr. Liao’s testimony that during her examination of complainant, she did not observe any depressed attitude or unusual agitation or disturbance on the past of the patient. That complainant was able to maintain a serene posture after undergoing the most harrowing and humiliating experience of her life is, to say the least, most unnatural and grossly art variance with the ordinary pattern of human behavior.

4. ID.; ID.; ID.; LENDS PLAUSIBILITY TO THE CONTENTION THAT SHE WAS THE SWEETHEART OF APPELLANT. — It is interesting to note than when she went to Bo. Guinsularan she was accompanied by her relatives. Yet it appears that she left the said place without them. In fact she allowed the appellant to escort her in going to Danao. As to her statement that she went to look for her relatives and after failing to find them decided to proceed to Bo, Danao, such a pretext has a hallow ring since Bo. Guinsularan is such a small place that it would not have been difficult for her to find them had she been diligent and determined in her search. Did she really want to keep their company? She also knew that Bo. Danao is seven kilometers away and that she would be benighted on the way. These circumstances notwithstanding, this "typical country girl" inexplicably ventured out for her destination in the solitary company of the appellant. Certainly, such conduct lends plausibility to the contention that she was really in love with him and wanted to be alone with her sweetheart.


D E C I S I O N


ESCOLIN, J.:


Invoking the constitutional presumption of innocence, appellant Francisco Bernat seeks to set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of Bohol finding him guilty of the crime of rape and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, to indemnify the offended party in the amount of P10,000.00 as moral damages, and to pay the costs.

Appellant admits having carnal relations with complainant Leonila Ampo on May 29, 1975. He contends, however, that he and Leonila were sweethearts and that their carnal intimacies were consummated with consent and out of mutual love.chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

The appellant’s version of the incident in question is as follows: He and Leonila became sweethearts during the barrio fiesta of Bo. Danao, Duero, Bohol, on May 20, 1975. When she accepted his love, he proposed marriage. But Leonila answered that their engagement was still too short and they should wait a little longer. Before parting that day, they agreed to meet again at the fiesta of Bo. Guinsularan, Duero, Bohol, to be celebrated nine days later. As he had expected, Leonila attended said fiesta. She went to Guinsularan with Pisyang Ampo and Paz Ampo. In the afternoon of that day, while they were watching a basketball game, a sudden, heavy downpour fell. After the rain, Leonila told him that she wanted to spend the night in the house of her aunt in Bo. Danao. He offered to accompany her to Danao and she readily accepted. On the way, they talked about their love for each other.

At about 6:00 in the evening, they came upon an uninhabited hut located in an isolated place. After having travelled a distance of about six kilometers, they decided to take a rest at the step-ladder thereof. There they embraced and kissed. He asked her to perform the sexual act. At first, she was reluctant to give in to his desire; but appellant persisted in his pleas and assured her again and again of his desire to marry her. Finally, "she was swept in a wave of passion." Thus, they consummated their first sexual intercourse.

When they resumed their trek, Leonila told him that she had no more desire to go home for she wanted to live with him forever. Soon after, they reached another hut owned by the appellant’s cousin, Juan Galia. In that hut, they performed their second sexual act and then went to sleep side by side. At 3:00 in the morning, he mounted on her again. After that third intercourse, they proceeded to the appellant’s house where they slept.

That morning, appellant’s father Zoilo Bernat asked him, "what kind of a woman is Leonila?" Appellant answered that she hailed from Pilar and that she was the girl he intended to marry.

Later appellant escorted Leonila to the road where she board a bus for home. Before her departure, she reminded him of his commitment to marry her.

Two weeks later, i.e., sometime in June 1975, appellant sent his father to the house of Leonila’s father to ask for her hand in marriage. Her father, however, turned down the proposal, alleging that marriage was out of the question as the honor of his daughter had already been violated.chanrobles virtualawlibrary chanrobles.com:chanrobles.com.ph

The trial court brushed aside the above testimony of the appellant and gave full credence to the following version of the complainant, to wit:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

On May 29, 1975, she, together with Pisyang Ampo and Paz Ampo, attended the fiesta of Bo. Guinsularan. In the afternoon, the basketball game they were watching was interrupted by a heavy rain. As the spectators scampered for shelter, complainant was separated from her two companions. After the rain, she looked for them, but having failed to find them, she decided to proceed to her aunt’s house in Bo. Danao, about 7 kilometers distant from Guinsularan. Appellant, who was a complete stranger to her, approached her and introduced himself. He then joined her and they conversed as they walked towards Bo. Danao.

At about 6:00 that evening, after having travelled on foot for about 6 kilometers, they saw an unoccupied hut. Appellant suddenly drew out a hunting knife (korta) and pointed it at her breast. At the same time he held her with his left hand, saying:" If you shout I will kill you; do not shout." Appellant removed his pants, exposing his sexual organ. He ordered her to go up the hut and when she refused, he dragged her on the ground towards the hut. Once inside, he threw her to the floor with great force. He removed her pants and panty, placed himself on top of her and inserted his sexual organ into hers. After satisfying his lust, he returned her clothes which she put on. They left the hut and proceeded to another hut about half a kilometer away. Again, Accused pulled out his knife and dragged her to the hut. Inside the hut, he pushed her to the floor and ravished her for the second time. Then they went to sleep. At about 3:00 in the morning she was awakened by appellant. He went on top of her and assaulted her for the third time.

At 5:00 that morning, appellant accompanied her to the road and gave her P5.00 for bus fare to go home to Estaca, Pilar, Bohol.

On June 2, 1975, i.e., four days after the incident, Leonila was examined by Dr. Soledad Liao. The doctor’s findings are as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Patient conscious, coherent and oriented as to time and place.

"Physical examination revealed no external signs of force or physical injury.

"Examination of the genitalia:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Presence of menstrual blood. Hymen edges distinct and regular. Admits index finger on internal examination. Vagina showed no sign of laceration.

The doctor further declared that the patient did not complain of any injury on any part of her body; 1 and that she did not show any sign of depressed attitude or unusual agitation or disturbance. 2

The crime of rape, by its very nature, usually involves only two persons, the offended party and the accused. As a consequence, the court in rendering judgment must rely almost entirely on the credibility of the complainant’s allegations. While the uncorroborated testimony of the complainant may be sufficient under certain circumstances to warrant a conviction, nevertheless, for this rule to obtain such testimony must be convincing and free from any contradiction. It should not be accepted unless her sincerity and candor are free from suspicion. 3

In the case at bar, the evidence adduced by the prosecution falls short of the quantum of proof required to overcome the presumption of innocence. Accordingly, reversal of the judgment of conviction is justified.cralawnad

Complainant alleged that on two occasions appellant had dragged her on the ground to a hut and that inside the hut, he threw her to the floor with great force. Considered in the light of the testimony of Dr. Soledad Liao, who examined complainant four days after the incident, the aforesaid claim appears inherently improbable. It bears emphasis that Dr. Liao did not find any abrasion, contusion, laceration or any other external or internal injury on the body of the complainant. Neither did the doctor find any injury in the latter’s genitalia. Tested against such findings, We reject the complainant’s claim that she had been subjected to physical violence, the same being contrary to the admitted physical facts of the case. Indeed, it is inconceivable that she had managed to remain unscathed after having been dragged on the ground and forcibly thrown on the floor.

Equally significant is Dr. Liao’s testimony that during her examination of complainant, she did not observe any depressed attitude or unusual agitation or disturbance on the part of the patient. That complainant was able to maintain a serene posture after undergoing the most harrowing and humiliating experience of her life is, to say the least, most unnatural and grossly at variance with the ordinary pattern of human behavior.

The trial court readily accepted complainant’s allegation that appellant was never her boy friend and that the latter was in fact a total stranger to her at the time of the incident. It rationalized its posture thus: "She appears to be a typical country girl reared under a conservative and moral atmosphere of the rural areas. Hence, it is hardly believable, as asserted by the accused, that she would accept the proposal of love so quickly or instantly. Instant lovers are rare in rural communities. The ordinary country girl in our barrios does not easily consent to carnal solicitations."cralaw virtua1aw library

The conduct displayed by the complainant does not justify the trial court’s conclusion. It is interesting to note that when she went to Bo. Guinsularan she was accompanied by her relatives, Pisyang Ampo and Paz Ampo. Yet it appears that she left Guinsularan without them. In fact she allowed herself to be escorted by the appellant in going to Danao. Of course, she stated that she looked for Pisyang and Paz in Guinsularan and that it was only after she failed to find them that she decided to set out for Bo. Danao. But the pretext has a hollow ring. Guinsularan is such a small barrio and it would not have been difficult for her to find them had she been diligent and determined in her search. But did she really want to keep their company? Note that complainant knew that Danao was seven kilometers distant from Guinsularan. She also knew that she would be benighted on the way. These circumstances notwithstanding, this "typical country girl" inexplicably ventured out for her destination in the solitary company of the appellant. Certainly, such conduct lends plausibility to the complainant’s contention that she was in love and wanted to be alone with her sweetheart.cralawnad

WHEREFORE, the judgment of conviction is hereby set aside and appellant is acquitted of the crime charged, with costs de oficio. His immediate release from custody is ordered, unless he is otherwise detained for some other legal cause.

SO ORDERED.

Makasiar (Chairman), Aquino, Concepcion, Jr., Guerrero and Abad Santos, JJ., concur.

De Castro, J., on leave.

Endnotes:



1. TSN, p. 52, June 16, 1976.

2. TSN, p. 53, Ibid.

3. People v. Fausto, 51 Phil. 852; U.S. v. Flores, 26 Phil. 262.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






July-1983 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-30063 July 2, 1983 - GOODYEAR TIRE AND RUBBER CO. v. TEOFILO REYES, SR.

    208 Phil. 249

  • G.R. No. L-45946 July 5, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FRANCISCO BERNAT

    208 Phil. 252

  • G.R. No. L-51182 July 5, 1983 - HELMUT DOSCH v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION

    208 Phil. 259

  • G.R. No. L-57875 July 5, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ERNESTO T. SUÑGA

    208 Phil. 288

  • G.R. No. L-58199 July 5, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FEDERICO B. BELMONTE

    208 Phil. 296

  • G.R. No. L-58910 July 5, 1983 - ROBERT DOLLAR COMPANY v. JUAN C. TUVERA

  • G.R. No. L-62114 July 5, 1983 - ISIDRO BERNARDO v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

    208 Phil. 314

  • G.R. No. L-32794 July 15, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUANITO B. CALIXTRO

    208 Phil. 317

  • A.M. No. 779-Ret July 20, 1983 - IN RE: APPLICATION FOR RETIREMENT OF ATTY. MARCELO D. MENDIOLA

    208 Phil. 338

  • G.R. No. L-28632 July 20, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BANGON TANOG

    208 Phil. 343

  • G.R. No. L-31103 July 20, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ERNESTO Z. LAKANDULA

    208 Phil. 350

  • G.R. No. L-34382 July 20, 1983 - THE HOME INSURANCE COMPANY v. EASTERN SHIPPING LINES

    208 Phil. 359

  • G.R. No. L-36847 July 20, 1983 - SERAFIN B. YNGSON v. SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE

  • G.R. No. L-59611 July 20, 1983 - LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR OF CEBU CITY v. RAFAEL T. MENDOZA

    208 Phil. 382

  • A.C. No. 1700 July 25, 1983 - OSCAR R. MANAHAN v. GREGORIO F. ORTEGA

    208 Phil. 387

  • A.C. No. 2311 July 25, 1983 - JAIME PELEJO v. PATERNO C. ZABALLERO

    208 Phil. 390

  • A.C. No. 2315 July 25, 1983 - ROSELA C. LU v. LAMBERTO LLAMERA

    208 Phil. 392

  • G.R. Nos. L-29182-83 July 25, 1983 - ESSO STANDARD EASTERN INC. v. ALFONSO LIM

    208 Phil. 394

  • G.R. No. L-29230 July 25, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DIOSDADO ALVARADO, JR.

    208 Phil. 412

  • G.R. No. L-32072 July 25, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALFONSO AQUIATAN

    208 Phil. 427

  • G.R. No. L-35102 July 25, 1983 - ANTONIO BORLONGAN v. COURT OF APPEALS

    208 Phil. 437

  • G.R. No. L-35273 July 25, 1983 - IGLESIA NI CRISTO v. HONORABLE JUDGE, BRANCH I CFI OF NUEVA ECIJA

    208 Phil. 441

  • G.R. No. L-36488 July 25, 1983 - CAPITAL INSURANCE SURETY CO., INC. v. RONQUILLO TRADING

    208 Phil. 451

  • G.R. No. L-36789 July 25, 1983 - FELIPA CORDERO v. VICTORIA P. CABRAL

    208 Phil. 456

  • G.R. No. L-38495 July 25, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. WILFREDO TOLEDO

    208 Phil. 469

  • G.R. No. L-39235 July 25, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUANITO GALICIA

    208 Phil. 472

  • G.R. No. L-40310 July 25, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SERGIO R. POSPOS

    208 Phil. 479

  • G.R. Nos. L-42571-72 July 25, 1983 - VICENTE DE LA CRUZ v. EDGARDO L. PARAS

    208 Phil. 490

  • G.R. Nos. L-47136-39 July 25, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMEO O. MANALANG

    208 Phil. 504

  • G.R. No. L-48319 July 25, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EFRENIANO BALANE

    208 Phil. 537

  • G.R. No. L-50638 July 25, 1983 - LORETO J. SOLINAP v. AMELIA K. DEL ROSARIO

    208 Phil. 561

  • G.R. No. L-53741 July 25, 1983 - SAMAHAN NG MGA MANGGAGAWA SA FIRESTONE v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION

    208 Phil. 566

  • G.R. No. L-55373 July 25, 1983 - GLICERIA CARANDANG-COLLANTES v. FELIX CAPUNO

    208 Phil. 572

  • G.R. No. L-55413 July 25, 1983 - DOLE PHILIPPINES, INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION

    208 Phil. 591

  • G.R. No. L-55674 July 25, 1983 - LA SUERTE CIGAR AND CIGARETTE FACTORY v. DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF LABOR RELATIONS

    208 Phil. 597

  • G.R. No. L-56441 July 25, 1983 - CLEMENCIO C. RAMIREZ v. SANDIGANBAYAN

    208 Phil. 627

  • G.R. No. L-56450 July 25, 1983 - RODOLFO T. GANZON v. SANCHO Y. INSERTO

    208 Phil. 630

  • G.R. No. L-56655 July 25, 1983 - DATU TAGORANAO BENITO v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

    208 Phil. 638

  • G.R. No. L-59546 July 25, 1983 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VICENTE CASAS

    208 Phil. 645

  • G.R. No. L-61349 July 25, 1983 - ANGELINA JAVIER v. EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION COMMISSION

    208 Phil. 650

  • G.R. No. L-62097 July 25, 1983 - RODOLFO RIVERA v. WILLELMO C. FORTUN

    208 Phil. 656

  • G.R. No. L-62810 July 25, 1983 - EULALIA MARTIN v. FABIAN VER

    208 Phil. 658

  • G.R. No. L-63531 July 25, 1983 - HEIRS OF FELICIANO NANTES v. COURT OF APPEALS

    208 Phil. 665

  • G.R. No. L-64033 July 25, 1983 - PROCESO SIDRO v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

    208 Phil. 671

  • A.C. No. 1251 July 29, 1983 - LILY LANGBID v. FELIX TIANGCO

    208 Phil. 675

  • G.R. No. L-29407 July 29, 1983 - ESTATE OF AMADEO MATUTE OLAVE v. MANASES G. REYES

    208 Phil. 678

  • G.R. No. L-31352 July 29, 1983 - JORGE DELECTOR v. ANTONIO M. OGAYAN

    208 Phil. 684

  • G.R. No. L-40504 July 29, 1983 - FORTUNATO RECENTES v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE

    208 Phil. 688

  • G.R. No. L-47410 July 29, 1983 - POLICARPIO CASTRO v. COURT OF APPEALS

    208 Phil. 691

  • G.R. No. L-52831 July 29, 1983 - MANUEL R. DULAY v. GLICERIO V. CARRIAGA

    208 Phil. 702

  • G.R. No. L-60129 July 29, 1983 - LEONOR J. VDA. DE JAVELLANA v. COURT OF APPEALS

    208 Phil. 706