Case Digest (G.R. No. 264870)
Facts:
XXX264870, Petitioner, vs. People of the Philippines, Respondent, G.R. No. 264870, April 21, 2025, Second Division, Leonen, SAJ., writing for the Court.
Petitioner XXX264870 was criminally charged under Republic Act No. 9262 (the Anti‑Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004) for acts alleged to have caused psychological violence against his wife AAA264870; the Information captioned the offense as violation of Section 5(h) but its averments described petitioner’s extramarital affair and impregnation of BBB264870, and alleged resultant mental and emotional anguish suffered by AAA264870.
At arraignment petitioner pleaded not guilty and trial ensued in the Regional Trial Court (Crim. Case No. R‑MKT‑18‑00092‑CR). The prosecution presented evidence that petitioner engaged in an extramarital relationship with BBB264870, fathered a child, and that his wife discovered the affair (she testified she fainted and was brought to hospital). A clinical psychologist, Nedy L. Tayag, produced a psychological assessment diagnosing severe PTSD attributed to psychological abuse. The trial court found petitioner guilty of Section 5(i) (mental or emotional anguish) of RA 9262 and sentenced him to an indeterminate term of imprisonment with a fine and ordered counseling and moral damages.
Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration in the RTC which was denied, and he appealed to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals (Fourth Division) affirmed the RTC conviction in its January 28, 2021 Decision and denied reconsideration in a December 21, 2022 Resolution. During post‑decision proceedings petitioner sought to admit an Affidavit of Recantation executed by AAA264870 before an assistant city prosecutor, in which she stated she was not hurt or devastated, that she and petitioner had an understanding about new relationships, and that she later sought reconciliation.
Petitioner then filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 to this Court. He argued (1) the Information charged Section 5(h) but he was convicted under Section 5(i), violating his constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; (2) the Affidavit of Recantation created reasonable doubt as to the essential element of mental or emotional anguish; and (3) various factual points undermined the prosecution’s case, including testimony that the compl...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was petitioner’s constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation violated when the Information caption charged Section 5(h) of RA 9262 but the conviction was for Section 5(i)?
- Does the Affidavit of Recantation by the private offended party and the other evidence create reasonable doubt warranting petitioner’s acquittal; and more broadly, is marital infidelity per se an act of violence cr...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)