EN BANC

When arraigned, the indictee pleaded not guilty to the charge.

The Case for the Prosecution. –Sppedscâ

Complainant Violeta Abella, the fourth of the seven children of accused Carmelito Abella, was just 15 years old. She was left alone with her father Carmelito and her two younger sisters, Andrea and Erlinda, at their house in Bocaue, Pamutan, Cebu City, by her mother and the other members of the family who attended a town fiesta celebration in Guadalupe, Cebu City. Shortly after nightfall of that day, the 12th of December, 1996, Violeta went to bed in the lone room of the house. The room was separated only by a curtain from the sala where her father and her two younger sisters stayed. Around midnight, Violeta was awakened when her father, who was half-naked, sat beside her. Violeta innocently asked what it was he wanted but he kept mum. Completely caught by surprise, she was suddenly held by the accused by her shoulders and forced to again lie down on the bed. Violeta vainly tried to struggle free from the firm hold of the accused. He succeeded in removing Violeta’s underwear, then her dress, before finally mounting her. Violeta shouted for help but it was futile. The carnal knowledge of her lasted for about an hour. Crying, Violeta asked her father "why" but he could only say that he felt the urge for it (Ganahan siya2 [TSN, Violeta Abella, 22 August 199, p. 19.]). Before going back to sleep in the sala, he threatened Violeta with death if she were to tell on him. Violeta spent the rest of the night awake numbly waiting for daybreak to come.

The following day, Violeta took her usual morning bath, dressed up and, without partaking of breakfast, went to school straightaway. Violeta simply ignored her father when he asked her to be home early from school. That afternoon, Violeta decided to tell her teacher about the incident. The latter lost no time in bringing Violeta to the office of the Department of Social Welfare and Development ""DSWD"). Violeta decided not to return home that afternoon; instead, assisted by the DSWD, she had herself examined by a medico legal officer of PNP Crime Laboratory 7, at Gorordo Avenue, Cebu City. The medical report of Dr. Nestor A. Sator, Police Senior Inspector and Head of the Medico Legal Branch of the PNP Crime Laboratory, disclosed: Calrspä ped

The Case for the Defense.- Misoedpâ

The accused claimed that on the night of 12 December 1996, he consumed one long bottle of Tanduay rhum and a stick of cigarette which, according to a stranger who gave it, had a "soothing effect." He wanted to drown his worries because the land he had been tilling for sometime was about to be taken over by its owner. After doing away with the rhum and the stick of cigarette, he felt like floating in the air. He had no recollection about his having supposedly entered the room of his daughter, let alone of having sexually abused her, that night. All he could remember was that he took supper with his children, drunk an entire bottle of Tanduay rhum and smoked a stick of cigarette. He was certain, however, that he went to sleep at about nine o’clock in the evening, together with his two young daughters, while Violeta slept in the only other room of the house. When he woke up the following morning he was still wearing his long pants and his underwear.

He later learned that Violeta had been brought by her teacher to the DSWD and that her daughter was readying to file a complaint for rape against him. Fearing that people would harm him, the accused sought the advice of barangay councilwoman Nida Bacus who, in turn, accompanied him to the barangay captain. The latter forthwith brought him to the Punta Prinsesa police precinct where he was investigated. Eventually, he case was indorsed to the Philippine National Police Headquarters at Camp Sotero Cabahug, Gorordo Avenue, Cebu City, where he was kept under detention. Edpâ mis

After protracted trial, the Regional Trial Court, Branch 14, of Cebu City, rendered a decision on 15 October 1997 finding accused Carmelito S. Abella guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape. The trial court handed down its judgment, thus:

In his appeal brief, accused-appellant would seek to ascribe to the court a quo the following errors allegedly committed by it, i.e., that-

The claim of appellant that the trial court has erred in finding the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape is not tenable; on the contrary, the evidence for the prosecution sustains, with moral certainty, the guilt of the accused in the perpetration of the crime charged.

The defense here now asserts that while Violeta has declared that her father employed force against her, nowhere in her testimony, however, did she mention about having sustained any external injury or suffered bodily harm. Appellant fails to realize that he enjoys moral ascendancy and influence over Violeta, his own daughter, a circumstance that has been held to substitute for physical violence or intimidation in an indictment for rape.6 [People vs. Burce, 269 SCRA 293.] The matter, it should be stressed, is to be viewed in the light of the perception and judgment of the victim at the time of the commission of the offense, rather than that of the malefactor.7 [People vs. Edualino, 271 SCRA 189.] At all event, the absence of any external sign or physical injury does not necessary negate the occurrence of rape,8 [People vs. Alimon, 257 SCRA 658.] proof of injury not-being an essential element of that crime.9 [People vs. Pajaro, 265 SCRA 668.] Edpä sc

Neither availing to appellant is his contention that it would have been improbable for the rape to take place considering the presence of the two younger sisters of Violeta just outside the bedroom. The crime of rape is not always done in seclusion. The Court has more than once observed that rape can be committed in a room adjacent to where the other members of the family might be or even in a room which the victim might be sharing with others.10 [People vs. Burce, 269 SCRA 293, People vs. Tan, Jr., 264 SCRA 425.]

Appellant considers it rather strange that in the morning following the alleged rape, Violeta has not at all acted abnormally but that, in fact, she did her normal chores. It is not unusual, however, for a rape victim, immediately following the sexual assault, to conceal at least momentarily the incident. This attitude is understandable for a variety of reasons, such as because of great apprehension, a feeling of being completely lost or, like here, when the accused has moral ascendancy over the victim.11 [People vs. Tan, Jr., 264 SCRA 425.] Indeed, different and varying degrees of behavioral responses, it is said, can be expected in the proximity of, or in confronting, an uncommon occurrence.12 [People vs. Talledo, 262 SCRA 544.] In any event, it is to be noted that Violeta did, in fact, report the incident to her teacher the day following the sexual assault.

The Court’s attention has not been called to any dubious reason or improper motive on the part of Violeta that would have made her charge and testify falsely against appellant in so heinous a crime as rape. Violeta has had no record of sexual perversity to fabricate a story against her own father that could imperil his liberty or even his life.13 [See People vs. Fuensalida, 281 SCRA 452.] Where no compelling and cogent reason is established that can explain that the complainant has been so driven as to blindly implicate an accused, the testimony of a young girl of having been the victim of a sexual assault cannot be discarded.14 [People vs. Oarga, 259 SCRA 90.] Sccalä r

Violeta gave a vivid and credible account of her ordeal in the hands of her father. By then already 17 years of age, she testified:

"x x x.......x x x.......x x x.

The testimony of the victim stands not alone in the records; her revelation is corroborated by the medical findings16 [People vs. Oarga, supra.] of Dr. Nestor A. Sator. The latter himself has given testimony at the trial; thus:

The Court, however, agrees with the accused-appellant that the trial court did err in imposing the death penalty. The pertinent provisions of Republic Act No. 7659 state: Chief

The Court emphasizes anew in decreeing the death penalty under the aforequoted law, the information or complaint must specifically allege the qualifying circumstances that would justify the imposition of that extreme penalty. In this case, the circumstances that would qualify the offenses are (a) that the accused-appellant ids the father of the victim, and (b) that the latter is under 18 years of age at the time of the rape. While the criminal complaint in this case did state the fact that the victim is the daughter of the accused-appellant, it , however, has failed to mention her being under 18 years of age at the time of the commission of the offense. The omission is a fatal flaw in the imposition of the death penalty.

In recent rulings of the Court, among them the case of People vs. Dela Cuesta,18 [G.R. No. 126134, 02 March 1999.] the doctrine has been laid down thus: lex

All then given, the finding of guilt by the trial court should be affirmed but the penalty warranted therefor is the lower indivisible penalty of reclusion perpetua. Correspondingly, the offended party is entitled to P50,000.00 by way of indemnity ex delicto, plus an amount of P50,000.00 in moral damages,19 [People vs. Dimapilis, G.R. No. 128619-21, 17 December 1998.] which accused-appellant must be ordered to pay. Actual damages has been neither claimed nor established; hence, the trial court did not err in failing to make an award therefor. Jä lexj

WHEREFORE, the decision of the Regional Trial Court, 7th Judicial Region, Branch 14, of Cebu City, in Criminal Case No. CBU-43104 is MODIFIED by now holding that accused-appellant is guilty only of simple rape and sentenced to suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA. Accused-appellant shall indemnify the victim the amounts of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and another P50,000.00 as moral damages. Costs against appellant.

Davide, Jr., C.J., Bellosillo, Melo, Puno, Kapunan, Mendoza, Panganiban, Quisumbing, Purisima, Pardo, Buena, Gonzaga-Reyes, and Ynares-Santiago, JJ., concur.10/29/99 1:53 PM