Title
Maulit vs. Samonte
Case
G.R. No. 34484
Decision Date
Dec 13, 1930
Husband convicted of concubinage; wife pardoned him, but he was imprisoned. Supreme Court ruled concubinage a private offense, allowing pardon, and ordered his release.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 34484)

Background Facts

Fernando Maulit, who has been legally married to Maxima Agcaoili since 1919, abandoned his wife and cohabited with a concubine, Sabina Tabatiag, with whom he fathered a child. This led to Maxima filing charges of concubinage against him, resulting in a conviction and a sentence of imprisonment that was affirmed by the Supreme Court.

Legal Documents and Conditional Pardon

While awaiting imprisonment, Maxima executed an affidavit in which she expressed her forgiveness towards Maulit. She attested to his remorse and requested that authorities grant him a pardon despite his conviction. She emphasized that her decision was made voluntarily and without any coercion.

Legal Issue on Condonation

Despite the pardon granted by Maxima, the authorities maintained that Maulit was still subject to imprisonment. It was argued that under Act No. 1773, concubinage was classified as a public crime that could not be extinguished by condonation. This prompted Maxima to file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

Court Ruling on the Writ of Habeas Corpus

The Court of First Instance, presided over by Judge Fermin Mariano, ruled in favor of Maxima's petition. The judge determined that concubinage, unlike the offenses expressly classified as public crimes under Act No. 1773, remains a private offense that could be extinguished through condonation. Consequently, the court ordered the release of both Maulit and his concubine.

Appeals and Legislative Interpretation

The provincial fiscal, representing the provincial governor, appealed the decision, arguing that the close similarity between concubinage and adultery warranted the classification of both as public crimes, thereby making the latter applicable to Maulit’s case. This argument suggested that the legislative intent behind differentiating between adultery and concubinage indicated a shift towards public crime status for all marital infidelities.

Analysis of Criminal Liability

The court observed that while concubinage and adultery share similarities, the Penal Code treats them as distinct offenses, with different penalties. The absence of explicit inclusion of concubinage as a public cri

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.