Case Digest (G.R. No. 250627)
Facts:
In G.R. No. 250627, December 7, 2022, the Supreme Court resolved a Petition for Review on Certiorari filed by Sandra Jane Gagui Jacinto (petitioner) against Maria Eloisa Sarmiento Fouts (respondent). The petition challenged the Branch 73, Regional Trial Court, Antipolo City Orders of July 24, 2019 and November 28, 2019 in Criminal Case No. 18-60992, which denied Jacinto’s Motion to Quash the Information charging her with violation of Section 5(a), paragraph 2 of Section 6(a) of Republic Act No. 9262 (Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act) and Section 5(k) of RA 8369. According to the Information dated June 8, 2018, Jacinto, Fouts’s live-in partner of 16 years, allegedly assaulted Fouts on January 14, 2018 in Antipolo City by forcefully pushing her, crushing her hands with a car door, inflicting injuries requiring medical attention and resulting in incapacity for less than thirty days. Fouts also claimed that earlier threats and forcible attempts to eject her from thCase Digest (G.R. No. 250627)
Facts:
- Petition and Proceedings
- Sandra Jane Gagui Jacinto (petitioner) filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 seeking to reverse and set aside the RTC-Antipolo City’s Orders of July 24, 2019 and November 28, 2019, which denied her Motion to Quash the Information.
- The challenged Orders ruled that Republic Act No. 9262 (Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act) applies to lesbian relationships.
- Information and Allegations
- On June 8, 2018 an Information was filed charging petitioner with violation of Section 5(a) in relation to paragraph 2 of Section 6(a) of RA 9262 and Section 5(k) of RA 8369 for assaulting her live-in partner, Maria Eloisa Sarmiento Fouts (respondent).
- Respondent alleged: a) a 16-year live-in relationship; b) breakup during Christmas 2017; c) petitioner’s demands for property and credit-card debts; d) threats to burn the house; e) drugging with Rivotril; f) forcible undressing and photographing; g) assault in a car resulting in fractured wrist requiring surgery and therapy.
- Petitioner’s Counter-Allegations and Motion to Quash
- Petitioner contended the Information was a retaliatory leverage for her civil cases on property reconveyance, annulment of title, and damages.
- She claimed respondent provoked her, grabbed her hands to prevent her entry into a car, causing respondent’s fall and injury.
- Petitioner moved to quash the Information on the ground that RA 9262 does not cover lesbian relationships.
Issues:
- Proper Remedy
- Whether a petition under Rule 45 is the proper remedy to assail the RTC’s interlocutory denial of a Motion to Quash.
- Statutory Coverage
- Whether RA 9262’s definition of “any person” in Section 3(a) encompasses perpetrators in lesbian relationships.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)