PEOPLE v.

JAVIER
26 July 1999 | Melo, J. | Automatic review | …

PETITIONER: People of the Philippines

RESPONDENT: Amado Sandrias Javier
SUMMARY: Amado Javier was charged with one count of rape and two counts of qualified seduction against his daughter Julia.
The SC held that Javier should have been charged with three counts of rape instead.
DOCTRINE: Assuming that the prosecution failed to prove the use of force, Javier cannot be convicted of qualified seduction. It is
only when the complaint for rape contains allegations for qualified seduction that the accused may be convicted of the latter in case
the prosecution fails to prove the use of force by the accused (People vs. Antido, 278 SCRA 425 [1997]). To do otherwise would be
violating the constitutional rights of the accused to due process and to be informed of the accusation against him. While the two
felonies have one common element which is carnal knowledge of a woman, they significantly vary in all other respects (Gonzales vs.
Court of Appeals, 232 SCRA 667 [1994]).

FACTS:
1. Amado, convicted of and sentenced for illegal possession of firearm, was charged with three counts of rape committed on October
20, November 18 and December 19, 1994. The victim was his lone daughter, Julia, who was the only child of four living with her
parents in the Javier dwelling in Cagayan de Oro. The Informations detail the rapes as having been made possible through punching
Julia in the abdomen to unconsciousness inside the conjugal room of the Javier dwelling, and threatening her to silence, while
Julia’s mother Emma was doing laundry work at 1PM.
2. Julia testified that she kept silent until she could not stand the pain and went to her maternal grandmother Librada Ratunil, where
she was asked who got her pregnant. Librada wrote Emma and they decided to file complaints at the Bulua Police Station.
3. Dr. Tammy Uy, NBI, National Bureau of Investigation, found lacerations at 6 and 9 o’clock compatible with intercourse as alleged
and pregnancy signs for the second trimester such as a positive pregnancy sign. DSWD Psychologist Ma. Lavern Labitad Jabien
who found her to be suffering from inferiority complex, inadequacy and insecurity; she was also mentally deficient as a result of
poor parenting or parental deprivation.
4. Accused-appellant disputed the charges against him, alleging they were engineered by his mother-in-law, Librada, who despises
him for being a drunkard. He further declared that Julia is an errant daughter, who at 14 started attending dances and acquired
several sweethearts, getting pregnant as well; thus, he beat her. He proffered an alibi that he was working at the time of the rape:
employer Bernabe Granada engaged him for masonry work in the house of Carlito Caudor.
5. On June 8, 1996, the RTC Cagayan de Oro found Javier guilty of Rape under Criminal Case No. 95-136 and of Qualified Seduction
in Criminal Cases No. 95-147 and 95-148.

ISSUE/S:
1. Whether Javier was correctly convicted beyond reasonable doubt for the first count of rape—YES.
2. Whether Javier could be convicted for another two counts of qualified seduction—NO.
3. Whether Javier may be made to acknowledge Julia’s child as his own—NO.
4. Whether the death penalty may be imposed in this case—NO.

RULING: Judgment modified so that:

 Javier found guilty of three counts of simple rape, and sentenced to reclusion perpetua for each count
 Javier shall indemnify the victim for each count: P50k civil indemnity, P50k moral, and P20k exemplary damages
 The trial court judgment ordering Javier to recognize and acknowledge the child as his son is deleted

RATIO:
1. The questions to the credibility of the complainant Julia cannot prevail; Javier’s guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt.
 Julia is not a prostitute impregnated by her one-year sweetheart Michael Apduhan; she never met him without her mother or
her barkada. In any case, the moral character of the victim is immaterial in the prosecution and conviction of the accused. Even
a prostitute can be the victim of rape (People vs. Edualino, 271 SCRA 189 [1997]) for she can still refuse a mans lustful
advances (People vs. Iglanes, 272 SCRA 113 [1997]).
 The claim that the case was instigated by Julia’s grandmother Librada due to her disapproval of Amado as Emma’s husband
fails to sway the Court from lending full credence to the steadfast testimony of complainant. On the contrary, Amado admitted
that his relationship with Librada is not strained, as his mother-in-law used to extend assistance to his family.
 The claim that Julia was merely impelled by revenge in filing as he used to scold and beat her for disobedience, especially after
coming to know of her pregnancy. It takes a certain amount of psychological depravity for a young woman to concoct a story
which would jail her father and drag the rest of the family including herself to a lifetime of shame.
 Julia’s delay in reporting rape does not undermine the charge where it is grounded on the accused’s death threats coupled with
a pistol in his possession and the fact that the accused was her father with whom she lived.
 Amado’s defense of alibi was properly rejected by the trial court as his work place as a mason in the house of Bernabe Granada
is merely 200 meters or a 5-minute leisurely walk away, this defense cannot prevail over complainants positive identification
 as it was not physically impossible for him to have been at the scene of the crime at the time of its commission.
2. Javier used practically the same force and intimidation in committing the crime thrice under Article 335 (par. 2) RPC so the two
charges of qualified seduction should have been dismissed and the proper informations for rape should be filed.
 The force and violence required in rape cases is relative. In rape committed by a father against his own daughter, the formers
moral ascendancy and influence over the latter may substitute for actual physical violence and intimidation (People vs. Casil).
Physical resistance also need not be established in rape when intimidation is exercised upon the victim, such as fear for life and
personal safety in this case.
 Assuming that the prosecution failed to prove the use of force, Javier cannot be convicted of qualified seduction. It is only
when the complaint for rape contains allegations for qualified seduction that the accused may be convicted of the latter in case
the prosecution fails to prove the use of force by the accused (People vs. Antido, 278 SCRA 425 [1997]). To do otherwise
would be violating the constitutional rights of the accused to due process and to be informed of the accusation against him.
While the two felonies have one common element which is carnal knowledge of a woman, they significantly vary in all other
respects (Gonzales vs. Court of Appeals, 232 SCRA 667 [1994]).
3. The trial court ordered accused-appellant to recognize the child born to complainant despite the fact that said accused-appellant is a
married man. The rule is that if the rapist is a married man, he cannot be compelled to recognize the offspring of the crime as his
child, as the character of its origin legally prevents him from doing so (People vs. Guerrero).
4. SEC. 11 of RA 7659 modified Art. 335 RPC1 to impose the death penalty in cases of victims under 18 who are raped by relatives or
their parent’s common-law spouse; in this case, the lack of proof of the victim’s age constrains the court to hold Javier liable only
of simple rape, and to reduce the penalty to the lower indivisible penalty of reclusion perpetua.
 In the case at hand, the complaints stated that the rape victim is 16 years old which therefore qualified her under the
aforequoted provision. However, it is significant to note that the prosecution failed to present the birth certificate of the
complainant. Although the victims age was not contested by the defense, proof of age of the victim is particularly necessary
as the victim is just two years less than the majority age of 18.
 In a criminal prosecution especially of cases involving the extreme penalty of death, nothing but proof beyond reasonable
doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime with which an accused is charged must be established by the prosecution
in order for said penalty to be upheld.

1
ART. 335. When and how rape is committed.- Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances: The death penalty
shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any of the following attendant circumstances: 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.