The Supreme Court has acquitted Ma. Fe Imelda Lapira y Tungol of the crime of Bigamy, ruling that the prosecution failed to prove all the elements of the offense beyond reasonable doubt. The Court reversed and set aside the decisions of the Court of Appeals and the Regional Trial Court that had earlier convicted her.
The Case
An Information was filed against Imelda, charging her with Bigamy under Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code. The accusatory portion stated that on or about April 17, 2001 in the municipality of Guagua, Pampanga, the accused, while married to Takahiko Sato, a Japanese National — a marriage celebrated on August 3, 2000 at Meycauayan, Bulacan — willfully contracted a second marriage. She pleaded not guilty during arraignment.
The prosecution presented Jimmy Fariscal, the private complainant and husband of Imelda, and Rev. Remigio C. Cabading, who allegedly solemnized the first marriage. Rev. Cabading's testimony was stricken off the record for his failure to appear during cross-examination. According to Jimmy, he and Imelda married in a civil ceremony on April 17, 2001. Their relationship went smoothly until November 2004 when Imelda went to Japan to work. Upon verification with the Office of the Civil Registrar General, Jimmy found that Imelda was previously married to Takahiko Sato.
Imelda insisted she did not commit bigamy. She asserted that her marriage with Takahiko Sato was a sham, resorted to only so she could enter Japan. She claimed what she signed was not a marriage contract but a blank piece of bond paper, and that neither Takahiko Sato nor Rev. Cabading was present when she signed. She also insisted she never applied for a marriage license. She presented Violeta P. Sañez, the Local Civil Registrar of Imus, Cavite, who confirmed that their office has no record of the application for the marriage license.
The Issue
The central question was whether the prosecution proved all the elements of Bigamy, particularly whether a valid prior marriage between Imelda and Takahiko existed, given the defense's evidence rebutting the presumed regularity of the marriage certificate.
The Ruling
The Court found that the prosecution failed to prove the existence of all the elements of the crime of Bigamy, warranting Imelda's acquittal on the basis of reasonable doubt.
In its disposition, the Court declared: "ACCORDINGLY, the petition for review on certiorari is hereby GRANTED. The Decision dated January 16, 201 7 and Resolution dated August 10, 2017 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 38253, which affirmed the Decision dated October 26, 2015 of Branch 51, Regional Trial Court of Guagua, Pampanga in Criminal Case No. G-7713, are REVERSED and SET ASIDE."
The Court added that petitioner MA. FE IMELDA LAPIRA y TUNGOL is ACQUITTED, and ordered that entry of judgment be issued immediately.
By the Numbers
- G.R. No. 233512
- Alleged first marriage to Takahiko Sato: August 3, 2000, Meycauayan, Bulacan
- Second marriage to Jimmy Fariscal: April 17, 2001, Guagua, Pampanga
- Information for Bigamy filed: May 15, 2008
- RTC Decision: October 26, 2015
- CA Decision: January 16, 2017
- CA Resolution denying reconsideration: August 10, 2017
- Certification of no marriage license application: January 14, 2009
The Court's Reasoning
The Court applied the principle from Genia v. People, where the conviction of an accused for Bigamy was reversed. In Genia, the prosecution relied on the presumption that a marriage certificate, being a public record, is prima facie evidence of its contents. The Court there held that when an accused presents substantial evidence sufficient to rebut the presumed regularity of the marriage certificate, the burden shifts back to the prosecution to prove the marriage's requisites with evidence beyond reasonable doubt.
Applying this, the Court found the prosecution relied primarily on the marriage certificate between Takahiko and Imelda to prove the first element of Bigamy — that the offender had been legally married. However, the presumption in favor of that certificate was overthrown by the defense's submission of the Certification dated January 14, 2009, showing no record of the application for the marriage license. Imelda's claim complied with the evidentiary requirements laid down in Cariaga.
The Court held that with no other proof of the validity of the marriage between Takahiko and Imelda, there was reasonable doubt as to the existence of a prior marriage — one of the elements of Bigamy. Reiterating Pulido, the Court noted that penal statutes are construed strictly against the State and liberally in favor of the accused, in keeping with the rule of lenity and the rule on strict construction of penal laws.
This report is based on the Supreme Court decision in G.R. No. 233512.
This report summarizes a public Supreme Court decision and is not legal advice.