Case Summary (G.R. No. 169077)
Applicable Law
The laws that govern this case include Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code concerning Bigamy and relevant jurisprudence, particularly Morigo v. People, which impacts the interpretation of marriage and invalidity therein.
Factual Background
Lolita Bumatay married Amado Rosete on January 30, 1968, when she was 16 years old. While her marriage to Amado was allegedly subsisting, she married Jose Bumatay on November 6, 2003. A complaint for Bigamy against Lolita was filed by Jona on August 17, 2004, claiming that Lolita knowingly entered a second marriage without a legally dissolved first marriage. Lolita stated in her Counter-Affidavit that she was informed of a petition for nullity of her marriage with Amado filed by her children.
Proceedings in the RTC
On November 8, 2004, an information for Bigamy was filed against Lolita by Prosecutor Bernardo S. Valdez. Subsequently, on January 2005, before her arraignment, Lolita filed a petition for the declaration of nullity of her marriage to Amado in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Dagupan City. On September 20, 2005, the RTC declared the marriage void ab initio, concluding that no valid marriage ceremony occurred between Lolita and Amado, as it was her sister who had married Amado.
Bigamy Case in RTC-San Carlos
Lolita's bigamy case in RTC-San Carlos witnessed her filing a Motion to Quash the Information on November 2, 2005, positing that since her first marriage was void ab initio, she could not be charged with Bigamy. The RTC granted Lolita's motion, citing the precedents in case law that affirmed that the declaration of nullity applied retroactively to the date of the original marriage.
Court of Appeals Decision
The Court of Appeals (CA), in its decision on August 28, 2009, affirmed the order of RTC-San Carlos quashing the information for Bigamy against Lolita. It stated that a motion to quash is a legitimate means to contest the validity of criminal complaints based on legal insufficiencies. The CA ruled that since Lolita's first marriage was declared null, there was no legal impediment preventing her from marrying Jose.
Issue Raised
Jona raised the issue of whether the CA erred in upholding the quashal of the Bigamy charge, arguing that the grounds for extinguishing criminal liability were not correctly applied.
Supreme Court Ruling
The Supreme Court denied Jona's petition, emphasizing that she lacked legal standing to pursue a review of the criminal case as Rule 110, Section 5 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure mandates that criminal prosecutions are to be conducted by public prosecutors. The Court reaffirmed that the
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 169077)
Case Overview
- Case Title: Jona Bumatay, Petitioner, v. Lolita Bumatay, Respondent
- Court: Supreme Court of the Philippines
- Decision Date: April 25, 2017
- G.R. No.: 191320
- Division: First Division
- Judge: Caguioa, J.
Procedural History
- Jona Bumatay filed a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court against Lolita Bumatay.
- The petition assails:
- The Court of Appeals' Decision dated August 28, 2009, which denied Jona's appeal regarding the bigamy charges against Lolita.
- The Resolution dated February 4, 2010, denying Jona's Motion for Reconsideration.
Factual Background
- Lolita Bumatay was allegedly married to Amado Rosete on January 30, 1968, when she was 16 years old, before Judge Delfin D. Rosario in Malasiqui, Pangasinan.
- On November 6, 2003, Lolita married Jose Bumatay while her marriage to Amado was still valid.
- Jona filed a Complaint-affidavit for Bigamy against Lolita on August 17, 2004, detailing the circumstances of both marriages.
- Lolita countered, claiming she believed her first marriage was null due to Amado's actions, including filing for nullity and later allegedly informing her of his death.
Bigamy Proceedings
- An Information for Bigamy was filed against Lolita on November 8, 2004.
- Lolita sou