THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. No. 243789. September 11, 2019.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.XXX, 1accused-appellant.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution datedSeptember 11, 2019, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 243789(People of the Philippines v. XXX). — Before this Court is the appeal 2 filed by accused-appellant XXX from the Decision 3 dated June 28, 2017 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08274. The appealed decision affirmed with modifications the Decision 4 dated April 22, 2016 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Caloocan City, Branch 124, finding XXX guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Statutory Rape in Criminal Case No. C-84956.
The Facts
In an Information 5 dated June 11, 2010, XXX was charged with the crime of Statutory Rape, committed as follows:
That on or about January 19, 2010 in Caloocan City, Metro Manila and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with lust and lewd design, and by means of force, threat and intimidation and with the use of a bladed weapon, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of one [AAA], 6 eleven (11) years old, against her will and consent.
CONTRARY TO LAW. 7
When arraigned on January 17, 2012, XXX pleaded "not guilty" to the crime charged. 8 Trial on the merits thereafter ensued.
Version of the Prosecution
On January 19, 2010, at around noon, AAA was at the house of her grandmother BBB with XXX, who was also living in the same house. AAA called him "Lolo Buboy," being the brother-in-law of BBB. XXX asked AAA to buy bread. AAA obeyed and when she returned to the house, XXX instructed her to bring the bread to her great grandmother CCC at the latter's apartment, to which AAA complied. Afterwards, AAA proceeded on her way back to the house. 9
On the way, AAA met XXX, who told her to go back to CCC's apartment and wait for XXX's sister DDD, as the latter will buy her a dress. AAA waited at CCC's room for about an hour but DDD did not arrive. CCC then went out and AAA was left with XXX. 10
XXX, while telling stories, started removing AAA's clothes. He then took off his clothes and inserted his penis into AAA's vagina. AAA cried because of pain. AAA narrated that XXX also threatened her, saying, "huwag daw po akong magsusumbong, kung hindi, gigilitan nya ako sa leeg."11 After dressing up, XXX again threatened AAA not to tell anyone about the incident, or he would shoot her with an arrow ("papanain"). 12
Despite XXX's threats, AAA relayed to BBB what happened as she feared that he would be waiting for her on her way to school. BBB confronted XXX and told him to leave the house. BBB then reported the incident to the barangay authorities and to the police as well. 13
After investigation, AAA was subjected to physical and genital examination. AAA's Initial Medico-Legal Report 14 revealed the following:
Hymen: Deep healed laceration at 4 & 6 o'clock position.
xxx xxx xxx
CONCLUSION:
Clear Evidence of penetrating trauma/force to the hymen. 15
Version of the Defense
XXX denied the allegations against him. He contended that he did not see AAA on January 19, 2010 and had no occasion to ask the latter to buy bread. He reasoned out that AAA was forbidden to come near him because of the ongoing dispute among their families over a certain lot that he and his sisters inherited from their parents. He averred that AAA's mother, FFF, wanted to build a house on the lot but he, as the overseer of the property, objected to it. When he was detained, FFF and the rest of BBB's children entered the lot and occupied the same. 16
In further denying the allegation of rape, XXX argued that the medico-legal examination on AAA, which was conducted three days after the alleged rape, showed that the hymenal laceration sustained by AAA were days prior to January 19, 2010 and, thus, negates the possibility that he raped AAA on the said date. 17
Ruling of the RTC
The RTC, in its Decision 18 dated April 25, 2016, found that XXX committed the crime of statutory rape under Article 266-A, paragraph 1 (d) of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), as amended. The dispositive portion of the decision states:
WHEREFORE, the Court finds [XXX] guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of statutory rape. Accordingly, he is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
Further, [XXX] is hereby adjudged civilly liable to AAA. Accordingly, he is hereby ordered to pay said private complainant: a) PhP50,000.00 as civil indemnity; b) PhP50,000.00 as moral damages, and c) PhP30,000.00 as exemplary damages with interest thereon at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum reckoned from the finality of this Decision until fully paid.
With costs against [XXX].
SO ORDERED. 19 (Emphasis in the original)
Aggrieved, XXX appealed his case to the CA. 20
Ruling of the CA
The CA, in its Decision 21 dated June 28, 2017, affirmed XXX's conviction. The dispositive portion of the CA decision reads:
WHEREFORE, the Decision of the x x x Regional Trial Court, Branch 124, Caloocan City, in Criminal Case No. C-84956, finding [XXX] guilty of the crime of Statutory Rape and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of ReclusionPerpetua and to pay AAA exemplary damages in the amount of PhP30,000.00 is hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS in that [XXX] is ORDERED to PAY AAA the amount of Php75,000.00 as civil indemnity and Php75,000.00 as moral damages, with interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from date of finality of the Decision until fully paid.
SO ORDERED.22 (Emphases in the original)
The CA held that the prosecution sufficiently established the elements of Statutory Rape. 23 The CA gave weight to AAA's positive identification of XXX as the one who sexually abused her on January 19, 2010. In rejecting the arguments of XXX, the CA emphasized that a medical examination of the victim is not indispensable to the successful prosecution of rape, and the absence of fresh lacerations in the hymen does not prove that XXX did not rape the victim. 24 Moreover, the CA did not give credence to XXX's claim on the alleged motive (dispute over a property) behind the filing of the case against him. It posited that it is unnatural for a parent to use his or her offspring as an engine of malice. 25
Hence, this appeal. 26
Ruling of the Court
The Court sustains XXX's conviction.
Statutory rape is committed when the offender has sexual intercourse with a woman under 12 years of age even if force, threat, and intimidation are absent. The absence of free consent is conclusively presumed when the victim is below the age of 12. At that age, the law presumes that the victim is incapable of giving intelligent consent to the sexual act. Thus, to convict an accused of the crime of statutory rape, the prosecution must prove the age of the complainant, the identity of the accused, and the sexual intercourse between the accused and the victim. 27
In the present case, carnal knowledge is evidenced by AAA's testimony. AAA categorically stated how XXX succeeded in having sexual intercourse with her on January 19, 2010.
XXX's argument that the presence of deep-healed hymenal lacerations on AAA's hymen negates the latter's accusation that he sexually abused her must fail in light of the fact that proof of hymenal laceration is not even an element of rape. Thus, the Court's disquisition in People v.Francica28 provides that:
The absence of external signs or physical injuries on the complainant's body does not necessarily negate the commission of rape, hymenal laceration not being, to repeat, an element of the crime of rape. A healed or fresh laceration would of course be a compelling proof of defloration. What is more, the foremost consideration in the prosecution of rape is the victim's testimony and not the findings of the medico-legal officer. 29 (Citations omitted)
Therefore, AAA's medical findings do not preclude the conclusion that XXX had carnal knowledge of her.
As regards AAA's age, it is undisputed that she was below 12 years old when XXX raped her on January 19, 2010. AAA's Certificate of Live Birth 30 showed that she was born on March 8, 1998. 31
As the trial and the appellate courts did, the Court likewise finds XXX's defenses of denial and alibi untenable. Denial and alibi are inherently weak and constitute self-serving negative evidence, which cannot prevail over the declaration of a credible witness who testifies on affirmative matters. 32 Thus, AAA's positive testimony that XXX sexually abused her deserves more credence than that of the latter's uncorroborated defenses.
The Penalty and the Proper
Statutory rape is punishable by reclusionperpetua in accordance with Article 266-B 33 of the RPC. Thus, the CA correctly affirmed the penalty of reclusionperpetua imposed upon the accused-appellant by the RTC.
In rape cases, the award of civil indemnity is mandatory upon proof of the commission of rape, whereas moral damages are automatically awarded without the need to prove mental and physical suffering. 34 The Court, thus, affirms the awards of civil indemnity and moral damages in the amount of P75,000.00 each.
The Court, however, notes that exemplary damages in the amount of P30,000.00 was awarded to AAA. In accordance with the case of Peoplev. Jugueta, 35 exemplary damages in rape cases are awarded for the inherent bestiality of the act committed, even if no aggravating circumstance attended the commission of the crime. Hence, the award of exemplary damages is increased to P75,000.00.
Finally, the monetary awards for damages shall earn interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum to be reckoned from the date of the finality of this Resolution until their full satisfaction.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the appeal is DISMISSED. The Decision dated June 28, 2017 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 08274, finding accused-appellant XXX guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Statutory Rape is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. Accordingly, accused-appellant XXX is ORDERED to pay victim AAA the following: a) P75,000.00 as civil indemnity; b) P75,000.00 as moral damages, and; c) P75,000.00 as exemplary damages. Accused-appellant XXX is additionally ORDERED to pay interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum on all the damages awarded computed from the date of the finality of this Resolution until their full satisfaction.
SO ORDERED." (Peralta and Hernando, JJ., on official business; Inting, J., no part, due to his sister's prior participation in the Court of Appeals; Gesmundo, J., designated additional Member per Raffle dated September 4, 2019.)
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) MISAEL DOMINGO C. BATTUNG IIIDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. At the victim's instance or, if the victim is a minor, that of his or her guardian, the complete name of the accused may be replaced by fictitious initials and his or her personal circumstances blotted out from the decision, resolution, or order if the name and personal circumstances of the accused may tend to establish or compromise the victims' identities, in accordance with Amended Administrative Circular No. 83-2015 (III [1] [c]) dated September 5, 2017.
2. CA rollo, pp. 104-106.
3. Penned by Associate Justice Romeo F. Barza, with Associate Justices Socorro B. Inting and Pedro B. Corales concurring; id. at 87-98.
4. Rendered by Presiding Judge Glenda K. Cabello-Marin; RTC records, pp. 187-201.
5.Id. at 2.
6. The real name of the victim, her personal circumstances and other information which tend to establish or compromise her identity, as well as those of her immediate family, or household members, shall not be disclosed to protect her privacy, and fictitious initial shall, instead, be used, in accordance with People v. Cabalquinto (533 Phil. 703 [2006]) and the Amended Administrative Circular No. 83-2015 dated September 5, 2017.
7. RTC records, p. 2.
8.Id. at 23.
9. CA rollo, p. 89.
10.Id.
11.Id.
12.Id.
13.Id.
14. RTC records, p. 130.
15.Id.
16. CA rollo, pp. 48-49.
17.Id. at 94.
18. RTC records, pp. 187-201.
19.Id. at 201.
20.Id. at 209.
21. CA rollo, pp. 87-98.
22.Id. at 97.
23.Id. at 93.
24.Id. at 94.
25.Id. at 97.
26.Id. at 104-106.
27.People v. Canares, 599 Phil. 60, 73-74 (2009).
28. G.R. No. 208625, September 6, 2017, 839 SCRA 113.
29.Id. at 135-136.
30. RTC records, p. 30.
31. CA rollo, p. 88.
32.People v. Sato, 747 Phil. 407, 416 (2014).
33. Art. 266-B. Penalties. — Rape under paragraph 1 of the next preceding article shall be punished by reclusionperpetua.
34.Peoplev.Buclao, 736 Phil. 325, 340 (2014).
35. 783 Phil. 806 (2016).