G.R. No. L-1990. March 15, 1950
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. LEONILO GANAL ET AL., DEFENDANTS. LEONILO GANAL, ARCADIO RAMOS (ALIAS DOMINADOR RAMOS), AND CASIMIRO CLEMENTE, APPELLA…
OZAETA, J.:
municipality of Angadanan, Isabela, various individuals armed with rifles and
revolvers broke into the house of the spouses Victoriano Vallejo and Primitiva
Pagaduan. At that time the spouses and their six children were sleeping in the
bedroom, and. four other persons including Braulio Simon, granduncle of
Primitiva Pagaduan, were sleeping in the sala. Both the bedroom and the
sala were lighted by a kerosene lamp. The spouses, who got up startled
by the intrusion, were ordered by the intruders to lie on the floor face down
and then asked for their money. They told the robbers to look for it in the
trunk (baul) located in the bedroom. The robbers ransacked the trunk
and took P900 in cash, jewelry consisting of watches, rings, necklace, and
earrings, and two blankets. The total value of the loot, including the cash, was
P1,460.
Not content with the robbery, one of the robbers dragged Primitiva Pagaduan,
31s downstairs and handed her to two other robbers, who took her to a rice field
about 100 meters north of the house, where three of the robbers raped her one
after another. The last one to rape her was the same robber who had dragged her
down from the bedroom, and he warned her that should she reveal their identity
she and all the members of her family would be killed. While the last rapist was
performing the bestial act, Primitiva Pagaduan heard a gunshot somewhere near
the house. The robbers fled immediately afterwards. Primitiva found her husband
dead about 17 meters south of the stairway of the house. He had been shot thru
the head.
The crime was reported that same night to the nearest authority, the barrio
lieutenant named Severiano Kasing, who lived about 400 meters from the scene of
the crime and who early the following morning went there to investigate.
Primitiva Pagaduan did not reveal to him the identity of the malefactors but
told him that she did not recognize them. However, she asked the barrio
lieutenant to send for the chief of police of Angadanan. when the latter came in
the afternoon of March 8, Primitiva confided to him that she recognized six of
the robbers who entered her room and who, according to her, were Leonilo Ganal,
Arcadio Ramos, Casimiro Clemente, Venancio Nolasco, Mauro Nolasco, and Venancio
Lagrmay. She did not reveal to the chief of the police, Antonio Melad, that she
had been raped because, she said, she was ashamed.
By order of the chief of police the body of Victoriano Vallejo was taken to
the municipal building of Angadanan, where it was examined and embalmed by Dr.
Eligio A. Montero. The following day, March 9, the family took the corpse to
Tayug, Pangasinan, for burial.
A complaint for robbery in band with homicide was filed by the chief of
police in the justice of the peace court of Angadanan on March 17, 1947, against
the six persons named by Primitiva Pagaduan.
On March 16, 1947, since the robbers who were known to Primitiva Pagaduan and
some of whom were residents of the same barrio of Amistad had not been arrested,
Primitiva went to the town of Gamu, Isabela, and there reported to Lt. Artemio
P. Bahia of the Constabulary that she could not return to her home in Amistad
because Leonilo Ganal and his companions were still at large. Lieutenant Bahia
accompanied Primitiva Pagaduan the following day to the barrio of Amistad, where
he continued the investigation. She revealed to Lieutenant Bahia the same names
of the six persons whom she said she recognized as the robbers. Upon being
questioned by him as to what the robbers did to her after being dragged to the
rice field, she revealed that she was raped by them one after another. On March
21 Lieutenant Bahia filed an amended complaint accusing the six persons above
named of robbery in band with homicide and rape. Of the six accused, only
Leonilo Ganal, Arcadio Ramos, and Casimiro Clemente were apprehended, the other
three—Mauro Nolasco, Venancio Nolasco, and Venancio Lagmay—having escaped and
not having been arrested up to the time of the trial of this case.
The trial court found the said three accused guilty of robbery in band with
homicide and rape and sentenced each of them to reclusion perpetua and
to indemnify Primitiva Pagaduan in the amount of P1,460, the value of the
articles and money stolen by the accused.
The appellants challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to prove their
guilt.
The witnesses who testified as to the identity of the robbers were Primitiva
Pagaduan, her granduncle Braulio Simon, and her 11-year-old daughter Eufegenia
Vallejo. Primitiva Pagaduan swore that she was able to recognize six of the
robbers, namely, Leonilo Ganal, Arcadio Ramos, Casimiro Clemente, Venancio
Nolasco, Mauro Nolasco, and Venancio Lagmay. Braulio Simon said that he was able
to recognize only two of the robbers, namely, Mauro Nolasco and the cross-eyed
man, pointing to the accused Arcadio Ramos. And Eufegenia Vallejo said that she
recognized only Mauro Nolasco and Venancio Nolasco, both of whom were still at
large.
We shall examine the proofs as to the identity of each of the three
appellants.
- Leonilo Ganal.—This appellant was well known to Primitiva Pagaduan
because he resided in the barrio of Amistad, he being married to a niece of the
barrio lieutenant, Severiano Kasing, and because in 1946-1947 he cultivated as
tenant a parcel of land belonging to the spouses Victoriano Vallejo and
Primitiva Pagaduan. As a matter of fact he admitted having been to the house of
said spouses several times before the crime in question was committed. Primitiva
Pagaduan identified him as one of the six robbers who entered her bedroom on the
night in question and as the one who dragged her downstairs and later raped her
and warned her not to reveal his and his companions’ identity on pain of death.
She said that she did not recognize the two other robbers who raped her because
each of them covered her face with his hat while raping her. Leonilo Ganal
admitted during the trial that there was no enmity between him and Primitiva
Pagaduan and that he knew of no reason or motive why she should testify falsely
against him.
The fact that Primitiva Pagaduan did not reveal to barrio lieutenant
Severiano Kasing the identity of any of the robbers including Leonilo Ganal was
satisfactorily explained by her during the trial by saying that she feared that
Leonilo Ganal and his companions might kill her and the members of her family if
she then and there revealed their identity. Besides, she did not feel free to
denounce Leonilo Ganal to Severiano Kasing in view of the latter’s relation of
affinity to the former.
A perusal of the testimony of Primitiva Pagaduan convinces us of her
sincerity and veracity. Besides, if she had no regard for the truth and intended
to make a false accusation, she could have induced her 11-year-old daughter
Eufegenia Vallejo and her granduncle Braulio Simon to corroborate her testimony
that Leonilo Ganal was one of the robbers.
Although Frimitiva Pagaduan’s testimony as to the identity of Leonilo Ganal
is uncorroborated, we believe with the trial court that it is sufficient. She
had ample opportunity to recognize Leonilo Ganal unmistakably. Leonilo Ganal was
well known to her. She knew his voice. There was light in the bedroom which
Leonilo Ganal and his companions entered to rob, and it was a moonlit night. It
was Leonilo Ganal who dragged her downstairs, followed his two unrecognized
companions in raping her, and then warned her not to reveal their identity on
pain of death.
We think the trial court did not err in not believing Leonilo Ganal’s alibi.
He said that on March 7, 1947, he was in the barrio of Magrumbuan, Cauayan,
Isabela, threshing palay from 7 o’clock in the morning up to midnight. It is
certainly unusual for rice threshers to work continuously from early morning to
midnight. He also said that he transferred to that barrio to live with his
mother on March 6, 1947, the day before the crime in question was committed.
Nevertheless he was arrested in the barrio of Amistad while he was playing
blackjack in the house of one Alberto de Jesus. He testified on
cross-examination that in May, 1946, he talked to Primitive Pagaduan regarding
his tilling of her land.
“Q. And you talked to her in her house, is not that a fact?—
A. Yes, sir.
“Q. You are familiar in /with/ the house because you have been there for many
days. Is it not?—A. Yes sir.
“Q. You know that house has one room and also has one sala. Is it not?—
A. I never went up the house of Primitiva Pagaduan, I only reached the yard
of the house.” (Pages 365-366, t.s.n.)
The last answer contradicts the previous answers and to our mind evinces
prevarication. Why should he lie about knowing that the house of the victim has
one room and one sala? He was evidently afraid to admit the truth lest
he exposed his guilt.
We are convinced by the evidence of this appellant’s guilt.
- Arcadio Ramos, alias Dominador Ramos.—This appellant is also well
known to Primitiva Pagaduan because he is married to the sister of the wife of
an uncle of hers named Mariano Simon. He was positively identified by Primitiva
Pagaduan as one of the robbers who entered her bedroom on the night in question.
Braulio Simon, the granduncle of Primitiva Pagaduan who was her visitor on the
night in question and who slept in the sala, also identified Arcadio Ramos as
the one who pointed a revolver at him while Mauro Nolasco held him down by the
neck. Although at that time Braulio Simon did not know Arcadio Ramos’ name, he
said he recognized him by face and that he is cross-eyed. No reason is suggested
by this appellant why Primitive. Pagariuan and Braulio Simon should testify
falsely against him.
The testimony of this appellant in his defense is patently unbelievable. He
said that he did not know Victoriano Vallejo and had not even heard of his name
before March 7, 1947. He also said that he did not know Primitiva Pagaduan. He
even denied having heard the news of the killing of Primitiva Pagaduan’s
husband, when he was arrested by the constabulary on March 20, 1947, he gave his
name as Dominador Ramos and not Arcadio Ramos, and during the trial he insisted
that his name was Dominador Ramos, although at the beginning when he was asked
to state his name and other personal circumstances he replied: “Arcadio Ramos,
42 years of age, carried, farmer, residing in the barrio of Pinoma, Gauayan,
Isabela.” He admitted on cross-examination that when the interpreter called the
name of Arcadio Ramos he responded to that name, and that when Braulio Simon
pointed to him the interpreter asked his name and he answered, “Arcadio Ramos.”
He testified that on March 7, 1947, he did not leave his house because he was
taking care of his wife, who was then complaining of headache.
In view of the apparent insincerity of the testimony of this appellant, on
the one hand, and of his positive identification by the witnesses Primitiva
Pagaduan and Braulio Simon as one of the robbers, on the other, we believe the
trial court did not err in finding him guilty.
- Casimiro Clemente.—This appellant was identified by Prirnitiva
Pagaduan as one of the six robbers who entered her bedroom on the night in
question. Her testimony, however, as to this appellant is debilitated by that of
Eduardo A. Abesamis, justice of the peace of Angadanan, who testified that on
Sunday, March 9, 1947, he met Primitiva Pagaduan in Echague. Isabels, on her way
to Tayug, Pangasinan. to bury her deceased husband, and that he then and there
took the opportunity to ask her how her husband was killed, and that she told
him that he was killed by robbers; “that there were six of them and among those
six she said she recognised four of them”; that Casimiro Clemente was not
mentioned by Primitiva Pagaduan as one of the robbers; that she mentioned
Leonilo Canal, Arcadio Ramos, and the two Nolascos; that she also did not
mention the name of Venancio Lagmay (one of those still at large).
In view of the fact that when Primitiva Pagaduan was called as a witness in
rebuttal she was not asked to comment on tho testimony of Justice of the Peace
Abesamis, that, testimony remains uncontradicted. Hence triers is no explanation
from her as to why she failed to mention to the justice of the peace the name of
Casimiro Clemente as one of the robbers. There is a possibility that she was not
very positive as to this appellant’s identity. Her testimony on this point being
uncorroborated, and having been weakened by that of the justice of the peace, we
entertain doubt as to the sufficiency of the proof of this appellant’s identity.
Such doubt must necessarily be resolved in favor of the accused, it being
preferable to acquit a guilty person rather than convict an innocent one.
It results from the foregoing that the appellants Leonilo Ganal and Arcadio
Ramos are guilty, while the appellant Casimiro Glernente is entitled to an
acquittal on reasonable doubt.
The crime committed is robbery with homicide and rape. Robbery with homicide
is punished by paragraph 1 of article 294 of the Revised, Penal Code with
reclusion perpetua to death. The fact that the crime was committed by a
band and was accompanied by rape must be considered as aggravating
circumstances. Under the second paragraph of article 296, any member of s. band
who is present in the commission of a robbery by the band shall be punished as
principal of any of the assaults committed by the band, unless it be shown that
he attempted to prevent it. The appellants Ganal and Ramos must therefore be
punished as principals of the crime of robbery with homicide. The penalty should
be imposed in the maximum degree, but in view of the lack of sufficient votes to
impose the death penalty, we are constrained to affirm the penalty of life
imprisonment imposed by the trial court. The trial court, however, erred, in not
sentencing the appellants to pay indemnities for the killing of Victoriano
Vallejo and the rape of his wife.
Wherefore, the sentence of the trial court is modified as follows: Leonilo
Ganal and Arcadio Ramos, alias Dominador Ramos, shall suffer
reclusion perpetua, shall jointly and severally indemnify the heirs of
the deceased victoriano Vallejo in the sum of P6,000 for the homicide and
Primitiva Pagaduan in the sura of P4,000 for the rape, plus the sum of P1,460 as
the value of the stolen articles, and shall each pay one third of the costs.
The appellant Casimiro Clemente is acquitted on reasonable doubt, with one
third of the costs de oficio.
Moran, C.J., Pablo, Bengzon, Padilla, Tuason, Montemayor, and
Reyes, JJ., concur.