THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. UNUH BAKANG AND INDANAN TARANG, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

People versus Bakang

The Case

This is the People of the Philippines against Unuh Bakang and Indanan Tarang, a criminal appeal from a conviction for what the trial court called double murder with multiple frustrated murder. Nine men were originally charged after a night raid on a house in Basilan, but only these two stood full trial. The case matters to a reviewee because the Supreme Court here draws a clean line between a complex crime under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code and a series of distinct felonies committed by separate acts, and because it confirms that conspiracy, treachery, and the special mitigating circumstance of illiterate non-Christians all operate together in a band attack.

Procedural History

Nine defendants were charged as principals in two cases before the Court of First Instance of Basilan City: one for robbery in band, and one for double murder with multiple frustrated murder. Only Indanan Tarang and Unuh Bakang stood full trial, the others having died, escaped arrest, pleaded guilty, been discharged as a State witness, or died during trial. After trial, the two were acquitted of robbery in band but convicted in the murder case and each sentenced to reclusion perpetua with the accessory penalties of the law. They appealed directly to the Supreme Court, which modified the judgment.

Facts

Late in the evening of June 10, 1959, nine armed men met at the house of Miutong in Candiis, Lamitan, Basilan City. After supper and conversation they boarded two vintas and went to Pe-ek, where at about ten o'clock they entered the house of Paleng Toto unannounced, fired two shots into the air, and woke the inmates. One bandit lit a native lamp.

The bandits then hog-tied the inmates, ransacked their pockets for valuables, and hacked them with bladed weapons on vital parts of their bodies before leaving. Paleng Toto and Mahajiril Toto were found dead. Three others, Kapek, Sabu Paleng, and Enjeng, were found alive but gravely wounded, and were saved from death by about three weeks of medical care at a hospital in Isabela, Basilan City.

The medical certificates described deep incised wounds penetrating the abdominal and thoracic cavities of the two dead victims, and hacking wounds on the head, arms, back, and knee of the three survivors. The bandits duly identified included the two appellants. The trial court found them guilty as principals, holding that there was conspiracy and that treachery attended the killing because the victims were hog-tied and defenseless when hacked.

Issues

• Whether or not the appellants were guilty as principals by reason of conspiracy or previous concert of criminal design.
• Whether or not treachery attended the killing of the victims.
• Whether or not the crimes committed constituted the complex crime of double murder with multiple frustrated murder under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code.
• Whether or not the aggravating circumstance of by a band was offset by the mitigating circumstance of illiterate non-Christians.
• Whether or not the civil indemnity for the two deaths should be raised.

Applicable Provisions

Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code, on complex crimes, provides:

When a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other, the penalty for the most serious crime shall be imposed, the same to be applied in its maximum period.

The Court held this provision inapplicable because the crimes were committed by different acts of hacking performed by different bandits, so there was no single act and no offense as a necessary means of another.

Section 106 of the Administrative Code of the Department of Mindanao and Sulu provides the mitigating circumstance invoked for the appellants:

Illiterate non-Christians shall be given the benefit of the mitigating circumstance of lack of instruction.

The Court held that this mitigating circumstance offset the aggravating circumstance of by a band.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court affirmed the finding of guilt. It held that the evidence clearly showed conspiracy or previous concert of criminal design, and it agreed with the trial court that the lone uncorroborated testimony of Endo Sahim, who claimed only he and two others committed the crime, could not overcome the prosecution evidence, especially since Sahim himself had admitted the appellants as companions when arraigned.

On the second issue, the Court held that treachery was correctly appreciated, because the victims were hog-tied and defenseless when some of the bandits hacked them on vital parts of their bodies.

On the third issue, the Court held that the lower court erred in treating the crimes as complex. The crimes were not complex because there were different acts of hacking performed by different bandits, and for this reason Article 48 was not applicable. There were, therefore, two distinct murders and three distinct frustrated murders, and the appellants are criminally liable for each and every one of them.

On the fourth issue, the Court held that the lower court was correct in finding that the aggravating circumstance of by a band was offset by the mitigating circumstance of illiterate non-Christians.

On the fifth issue, the Court raised the civil indemnity for each of the two deaths from six thousand pesos to twelve thousand pesos, following its ruling in the Pantoja case. It declined to increase the five hundred pesos awarded to each of the three frustrated murder victims, there being no evidence to justify an increase.

Doctrine

First, a complex crime under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code requires either a single act constituting two or more grave or less grave felonies, or one offense as a necessary means for committing another. Where the killings and the frustrated killings result from different acts of hacking by different participants, there is no complex crime; each felony is distinct and each carries its own penalty.

Second, conspiracy or previous concert of criminal design makes every participant liable as principal for all the acts of the band, even if he did not personally inflict every wound.

Third, treachery is present where the victims are hog-tied and defenseless when attacked on vital parts of their bodies.

Fourth, under Section 106 of the Administrative Code of the Department of Mindanao and Sulu, the mitigating circumstance of lack of instruction for illiterate non-Christians offsets the aggravating circumstance of by a band.

Disposition

The appealed judgment was modified: each appellant was sentenced to reclusion perpetua for each of the two murders and to an indeterminate penalty of six years of prision correccional as minimum to thirteen years of reclusion temporal as maximum for each of the three frustrated murders, ordered to pay twelve thousand pesos to the heirs of each deceased victim and five hundred pesos to each of the three frustrated murder victims, with the sentences to be served successively, and with costs against the appellants.

Remember This

Memorize the line that different acts of hacking by different bandits produce distinct felonies, not a complex crime under Article 48. Examiners use this case to test the single act requirement of complex crimes and the offsetting of by a band against the mitigating circumstance of illiterate non-Christians.