Case Summary (G.R. No. 218652)
Civil Nullity Proceeding and Its Outcome
In Civil Case No. 01-6043 before RTC Antipolo (filed by Karla Medina-Capili), the court declared on December 1, 2004 that the second marriage was void ab initio by reason of bigamy—i.e., contracting another marriage during the subsistence of a valid first marriage. That decision became final and unappealable.
RTC of Pasig Order Granting Dismissal
Relying on the Antipolo nullity judgment, the RTC of Pasig City on July 7, 2006 granted petitioner’s motion to dismiss the criminal case for bigamy, reasoning that nullification of the second marriage left no basis for the crime. The private prosecutor opposed, contending the civil nullity issues were not identical to the criminal elements and would not determine the charge’s viability.
Court of Appeals Reversal
On appeal, the Court of Appeals, in its February 1, 2008 decision, reversed and set aside the RTC’s dismissal order, remanding the case for further proceedings. It held that the civil nullity of the second marriage did not preclude criminal prosecution for bigamy. A motion for reconsideration was denied on July 24, 2008.
Issue Before the Supreme Court
Whether a subsequent final declaration of nullity of the second marriage may serve as a ground to dismiss a pending criminal charge for bigamy.
Elements of Bigamy under Article 349, RPC
Article 349 penalizes any person who, while a first marriage remains legally subsisting, contracts a second marriage. The essential elements are:
- Existence of a valid first marriage;
- No judicial dissolution or presumption of death of the spouse;
- Celebration of a second marriage; and
- Valid solemnization of the second marriage.
Supreme Court’s Analysis and Precedents
The Court reaffirmed that bigamy is consummated at the moment the second marriage is celebrated during the subsistence of the first marriage. Subsequent judicial declarations of nullity are immaterial to the criminal liability, as the crime’s acts and elements are complete upon contracting the second marriage. Allowing a civil nullity decision to bar criminal prosecution would unduly delay and frustrate enforc
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 218652)
Facts of the Case
- On September 3, 1999, petitioner James Walter P. Capili contracted a lawful marriage with Karla Y. Medina-Capili.
- On December 8, 1999, while the first marriage subsisted and without any legal dissolution or annulment, petitioner contracted a second marriage with Shirley G. Tismo in Pasig City.
- The second marriage was subsequently declared void or incipiently invalid by the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Antipolo City, Branch 72, on the ground that a subsequent marriage contracted during the lifetime of the legal wife is void ab initio.
Procedural History
- June 28, 2004: Information for bigamy filed against petitioner before RTC, Pasig City, Branch 152 (Crim. Case No. 128370).
- Petitioner filed a Motion to Suspend Proceedings, citing the pending civil case for nullity of the second marriage (Civil Case No. 01-6043) as a prejudicial question.
- December 1, 2004: RTC, Antipolo City, Branch 72 rendered a decision nullifying the second marriage between petitioner and Shirley G. Tismo.
- July 7, 2006: RTC, Pasig City granted petitioner’s Manifestation and Motion to Dismiss, holding that the second marriage had already been nullified and that “there is no more bigamy to speak of.”
- Private respondent appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA).
Decision of the Court of Appeals
- February 1, 2008: CA reversed and set aside the RTC’s July 7, 2006 Order and remanded the case for further proceedings, holding that the declaration of nullity was not a bar to prosecution.
- Jul