THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. AKAI, ANOL AND HADJIROL, DEFENDANTS AND APPELLANTS.

Appellants Akai, Anol, and Hadjirol were found guilty by the
Court of First Instance of Sulu of the crime of robbery with double homicide,
physical injuries and arson, and each was sentenced to reclusion perpetua
with the accessories of the law, to pay the heirs of the deceased Moro Asani an
indemnity of P2,000, and the heirs of Mora Basan the same amount, and to pay the
costs. The facts proven beyond reasonable doubt are as follows:

On the 12th day of May, 1946, at about 9 o’clock in the
evening, the three appellants, with six unidentified companions, opened fire at
the house where Asaali Asani, his wife Mora Basan, his daughter Musah, his
father Moro Asani, and other members of his family, Napsa and Mokahil, were then
living, at Sipanding, Siasi District, Province of Sulu. The result of the
shooting was that all the occupants of the house were hit and wounded except
Musah, a girl 12 years of age. All of them, except Moro Asani and Mora Basan who
were left inside the house, were able to jump from one of the windows and hide
among nearby cassava plants about five meters away.

Six of the malefactors, among them, appellant Hadjirol, went up
the house, while appellants Akai and Anol with one of their unidentified
companions remained on guard downstairs. All of them were armed with different
weapons consisting of bolos, spears and firearms. Akai and Anol had a revolver
and carbine, respectively.

Because there was a lighted lamp inside the house and the moon
was bright and because of the glare of the fire when the house was burned, the
wounded persons who were hiding among the cassava plants were able to recognize
the appellants, particularly, Akai and Anol, who had been firing their guns and
who afterwards remained on guard with their firearms held in readiness.

The assailants who went up the house, took away two gold rings
with pearls valued at P105; two earrings worth P120, and two gold rings worth
P60. Aside from this jewelry they also took two cows worth P200, and the house
which later they burned was valued at P150. After the house was burned, the
three appellants together with the six unidentified companions left the place.
The bodies of Moro Asani and Mora Basan were found almost completely charred
among the ashes of the house.

Three days thereafter, Asaali Asani met Lt. Paraji Usman while
the latter was leading a patrol. He reported the case to him and the lieutenant
after examining the place and victims of the crime, took Asaali to Siasi. On the
way Asaali told the lieutenant that it was not safe for him to disclose at that
time the names of the male-factors, but that he would do so upon reaching Siasi.
When they were already in Siasi, Asaali told Lt. Usman that three of the
assailants were appellants Akai, Anol and Hadjirol who, for that reason, were
immediately placed under arrest. The criminal complaint, however, could not be
filed immediately against them because then there was no justice of the peace in
Siasi as sea transportation between Siasi and Jolo was very scare. The complaint
was filed immediately upon the arrival of the regular justice of the peace of
Siasi.

All these facts were testified to by Asaali Asani, Napsa Asani,
Mokahil and Lt. Usman.

The defense tried prove that on the evening of May 12, 1946,
upon hearing gunshots and cries of help from the girl Musah, the two appellants
Akai and Hadjirol accompanied by Jama and Kuling went to the place of the crime
for the purpose of helping the victims. On their way they saw Concejal Joe Moro
who instructed them to proceed. Panas whom they met later followed them to the
place of the crime. Once in that place, while the house was still burning, they
took from the ashes the cadavers of Moro Asaani and Mora Basan. Soon thereafter,
Concejal Joe Moro arrived at the place and Asaali Asani told him that he had not
been able to recognize the malefactors and that nothing belonging to him had
been stolen. Concejal Joe Moro treated the wounds of the victims and the next
day he, with Panas, Jama, Kuling, Akal and Hadjirol, prepared food for the
visitors and gave their assistance in carrying the cadavers to the cemetery.
After the interment and during the prayers held for the dead victims, Asaali
Asani told Concejal Joe Moro again that he did not recognize the assailants but
was suspecting Alamia, Asanang, Kahal and Jamja.

The other appellant Anol was at the time of the crime,
according to him, at the Barrio of Latung about two hours’ walk from Sipanding,
and therefore he could have taken no part in the commission of the crime.

Concejal Joe Moro, the most important witness for the defense,
is the father-in-law of appellant Hadjrol and uncle of appellants Akai and Anol.
His having come to help the victims and to treat their wounds has been denied by
the victims themselves, who said that the day following the commission of the
crime Concejal Joe Moro refused to treat or even look at their wounds because of
their refusal to pay the P40 which he was demanding from them. Asaali Asani also
denied having made any statement to Concejal Joe Moro to the effect that he had
not been able to identify the robbers and that he was suspecting persons other
than appellants. The supposed cries of help allegedly coming from Musah was
denied by her and the other victims, and it is indeed very unlikely that a girl
of 12 years would have the courage under the circumstances to make such cries
not being then sure whether the criminals were already far away. And it is also
very unlikely that Jama, Kuling and Panas accompanied by appellants Akai and
Hadjrol, all of whom were apparently unarmed, would have had the courage to come
and help the victims in the face of malefactors who had been firing shots. As a
matter of fact, the surviving victims testified in a positive way that on that
evening nobody came to help them and that the first assistance they received
came on the following day. And on that day, neither the appellants nor their
supposed companions gave them any help in attending visitors or in the burial of
the dead victims, and with respect to Concejal Joe Moro after his claim for fees
was rejected he never appeared again before the victims.

It is important to note that three days after the commission of
the crime, according to the unimpeachable testimony of Lt. Paraji Usman, Asaali
Asani confided to him that three of the robbers were the herein appellants. In
the beginning Asaali, afraid of the assailant’s revenge, would not dare say
anything about their identity, but upon reaching the town of Siasi he made the
disclosure above mentioned. And this disclosure not only is sufficient rebuttal
of all the contrary statements attributed to him by Concejal Joe Moro but it is
also a strong corroboration to the eye-witnesses who testified for the
prosecution.

Several attempts have been made by the defense to impeach the
motives of some of the witnesses for the prosecution, but none of them has been
sufifiessful, as clearly shown in the briefs. The most important question in
this case is one of credibility of opposing witnesses and in this respect we
reiterate what we have said in People vs. De Otero, 51 Phil., 201, 209, to the
effect that “After everything is said and done, we come back, as we invariably
do in cases of this nature, to a recognition of the rule that the Supreme Court
will not interfere with the judgment of the trial court in passing on the
credibility of the opposing witnesses, unless there appears in the record some
fact or circumstance of weight and influence, which has been overlooked or the
significance of which has been misinterpreted.”

The felony committed is robbery with homicide, physical
injuries and arson, and the corresponding penalty is reclusion perpetua
to death. The aggravating circumstance of band is offset by the mitigating
circumstance of lack of instruction, but there are still the aggravating
circumstances of nocturnity and dwelling making imperative the imposition of
death penalty. However, there being no sufficient votes for the imposition of
capital punishment, the penalty imposed by the lower court may be affirmed.

With the only addition that appellants are also sentenced to
indemnify Asaali Asani in the amount of P635, the judgment appealed from is
affirmed with costs against the appellants.

Ozaeta, Paras, Perfecto, Bengzon, Tuason, Montemayor,
and Reyes, JJ., concur.

MORAN, C. J.:

Mr. Justice Pablo voted for this decision.