G.R. No. 251477 - People vs. Cualquera

Remedios I. Jugueta, acting as complainant, filed a letter-complaint on July 12, 1973, accusing Judge Alejandro R. Boncaros of partiality toward the accused in Criminal Case No. 526.
The complaint was submitted to Secretary of National Defense, Hon. Juan Ponce Enrile, and subsequently forwarded to the Supreme Court pursuant to Section 6, Article X of the 1973 Constitution.
The incident that sparked the complaint involved the handling of a criminal case for rape in Tarlac, where Marissa Jugueta – the rape victim – was involved.

The criminal case (Case No. 526) involved a criminal complaint for rape filed against Ruben Domingo, with Marissa Jugueta as the offended party.
On June 6, 1973, during the pre-trial proceedings in Branch IV where Judge Boncaros presided, the prosecuting fiscal, Wilfredo Macaraeg, summoned both the accused, Ruben Domingo, and the victim, Marissa, to the judge’s chambers.
Notably, Marissa’s mother, Remedios Jugueta, who was present in the courtroom awaiting the trial, was not invited to join the conference held in the Judge’s office.

Inside the judge’s chambers, Ruben Domingo and Marissa Jugueta sat before the judge’s desk for a conversation initiated by the fiscal.
During this meeting, Ruben Domingo proposed marriage to Marissa, an offer which she promptly declined.
As Marissa prepared to leave the room, Ruben kissed her on the cheek, prompting a notable remark from Judge Boncaros.

Upon witnessing the kiss, Judge Boncaros remarked, “bakit sa pisngi hindi sa labi” (translated as “why the cheek and not the lips”), a comment that later became the focus of the complaint.
The remark raised suspicion of partiality and an improper handling of court proceedings, especially given that the rape case might have been settled amicably if a marriage had taken place – a process legally encumbered by the fact that the victim was only seventeen years old and required parental consent.

After the initial inquiry by the Supreme Court, the case was referred to Justice Pacifico de Castro of the Court of Appeals for a more detailed investigation, report, and recommendation.
Although Remedios Jugueta did not personally appear during the hearing, her husband, Alfonso Jugueta, represented her and expressed that Remedios was no longer pursuing the complaint, especially since Judge Boncaros had inhibited himself from trying the rape case.
Despite the change in the complainant’s stance, testimonies were taken from Marissa and the respondent (Judge Boncaros) regarding the events that transpired.

The investigation revealed that while the incident in the judge’s chambers did not fully support the claim that Judge Boncaros grossly favored the accused, it nonetheless exposed certain shortcomings in his conduct.
Specific details raised included the imprudence of allowing an in-chamber discussion in the absence of the victim’s parent, especially given her minor status, and the inappropriate articulation of his remark which could be seen as condoning or trivializing the misconduct.
The context of the discussion, including the absence of proper protocol and parental involvement, further accentuated the impropriety of the proceedings.

Whether the conduct of Judge Boncaros in permitting a private conference between the accused, the victim, and the prosecuting fiscal—without the presence of the victim’s parent—amounted to an abuse of his judicial position.
Whether the judge’s remark, “bakit sa pisngi hindi sa labi,” was a spontaneous expression of indignation or a frivolous comment that implicitly condoned the inappropriate behavior of the accused.
Whether the overall handling of the pre-trial process by the judge, especially in the context of a case involving a minor, undermined public confidence in the impartiality and decorum expected of a judicial officer.