Title
People vs. Enriquez
Case
G.R. No. 10533
Decision Date
Nov 11, 1915
Dionisio Enriquez, believing his first wife dead after 19 years of absence, remarried in good faith; acquitted of illegal marriage due to lack of fraudulent intent.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 10533)

Facts:

  • Marriage to First Wife, Juliana Marcelo
    • The defendant, Dionisio Enriquez, contracted a canonical marriage with Juliana Marcelo on July 21, 1886, in the parish of Binondo, Manila.
    • Following the marriage, he left his wife and their children in the barrio of Bantan in Orion, Province of Bataan, around 1895 when he moved to Laguna as a postal employee.
  • Absence and Search for the First Wife
    • After relocating, the defendant experienced the upheavals of the 1896 and 1898 revolutions and later returned to the pueblo of Orion in 1901.
    • Upon his return, he could not locate his wife nor obtain any credible information regarding her whereabouts, despite his persistent and diligent search over a long period (approximately 19 years).
  • Contraction of the Second Marriage
    • Believing his first wife to be dead due to the prolonged absence and lack of information, Dionisio Enriquez contracted a second canonical marriage with Joaquina Trajano.
    • This marriage was solemnized on February 1, 1905, in the parish of Orion, Bataan, after due publication of banns and following the usual canonical procedures.
  • Reappearance of the First Wife
    • In December 1913, Juliana Marcelo, the defendant’s first wife, appeared in the pueblo of Orion.
    • During her testimony, she stated that she had been away—residing in Manila, Tarlac, and Victoria—from 1895 to 1913 and had no contact with or news of her husband during that period.
  • Statement of Civil Status
    • When contracting his second marriage, the defendant stated to the officiating priest that he was single.
    • This statement was later scrutinized but, given his reasonable explanation and the surrounding circumstances, was not deemed sufficient proof of fraudulent intent.

Issues:

  • Whether the defendant, having contracted a second marriage while still technically married, can be held criminally liable for the crime of illegal marriage.
    • Does the reasonable and well-founded belief that his first wife was dead negate the element of fraudulent intent?
    • Is his declaration of being single, made at the time of the second marriage, sufficient evidence of bad faith or malice?
  • Whether the procedural and evidentiary circumstances surrounding the absence of the defendant’s first wife support his claim of acting in good faith.
    • How does the long period of absence and the fruitless search for his first wife influence the evaluation of his intent?
    • Can the course of events and the adherence to canonical matrimonial formality, including the publication of banns, be taken as indicators of his honest belief?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.