Title
People vs. Lava
Case
G.R. No. L-4974-78
Decision Date
May 16, 1969
High-ranking Hukbalahap members convicted of rebellion, murders, and arsons; Supreme Court upheld trial court's rulings, affirming validity of charges, jurisdiction, and penalties.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-4974-78)

Charge and Information

Each information alleged that starting May 6, 1946, high-ranking officers of the Communist Party directed its armed arm (Hukbong Mapagpalaya ng Bayan) to rise against the government, committing armed raids, murders, lootings, arsons and terror to overthrow the state. Eight specific incidents (May 6, 1946–August 25, 1950) were enumerated as means to foment rebellion.

Trial Court Findings and Sentences

The Court of First Instance of Manila found twenty-six defendants guilty as principals or accomplices of the complex crime of “rebellion with multiple murder, arsons and robberies.” Death sentences, reclusion perpetua and varying prison terms were imposed. Five were acquitted.

Issues on Appeal

On appeal, the Supreme Court addressed:
• Whether rebellion can be complexed with common crimes;
• Duplicity or multiplicitous charges in the information;
• Territorial jurisdiction in Manila;
• Admissibility of reconstituted exhibits;
• Adequacy of time and opportunity to prepare defense;
• Individual participation and degree of criminal responsibility.

Scope of Rebellion Under the Revised Penal Code

Rebellion is defined (Art. 134) as rising publicly and taking arms to remove government power or territory; its overt acts (Art. 135) include war-like violence, destruction of property, killings and extortion. Under settled jurisprudence (People v. Hernandez), acts of murder, arson or robbery in pursuit of rebellion are absorbed into that single offense and not subject to separate penalties or Article 48 complex-crime treatment.

Duplicity and Proper Form of Information

The informations were not duplicitous because they charged one single offense—rebellion—and recounted specific acts as means of its commission. Section 12, Rule 117, Rules of Court permits allegations of related acts constituting a single crime.

Territorial Jurisdiction of Trial Court

Manila was properly chosen as forum. Though specific acts occurred elsewhere, the informations alleged Manila as the “nerve center” where the conspiracy was agreed and commands issued, satisfying Rule 110(14) on venue when any essential ingredient occurred there.

Authentication and Reconstitution of Destroyed Exhibits

Original documentary evidence was destroyed in a 1958 fire at PC headquarters. Under Act 3110, faithful photostatic and typed copies were introduced as secondary evidence, identified by custodians, compared to original inventories and admitted over defense objection. Supreme Court approved the commissioner’s reconstitution report.

Opportunity to Prepare Defense

The joint trial spanned months, with all defendants represented, deposed, and allowed full time to prepare. Witnesses testified for defense; those who refrained from testifying exercised right under law. No deprivation of due process was shown.

Individual Findings: Principals of Rebellion

Beyond reasonable doubt, key leaders of the Communist Party and its military arm were found to have promoted, maintained or directed armed uprising, qualifying as principals under Art. 135(1):
• Jose Lava (General Secretary, Politburo/Secretariat member)
• Federico M. Bautista (National Finance Committee, Military Committee member)
• Federico Maclang (Organizational Bureau chief, Secretariat member)
• Ramon Espiritu (Politburo/Secretariat member, Military Committee member)
• Iluminada Calonje (National Communications Division chairman)
• Angel Baking (Head of Special Warfare Division, Technological Group)
• Cesareo Torres (Head of CPP propaganda office, publisher of party organ)
• Simeon G. Rodriguez (National Finance Committee member)
• Honofre Mangila (Central Committee member, organizational auditor)
• Cenon Bungay (Regional Commander, active Huk squadron leader)

Each was affirmed guilty as principal in simple rebellion and resentenced under Art. 135(1) to ten years of prision mayor and a fine of ₱20,000 (no subsidiary imprisonment for insolvency), with legal accessories and cost shares.

Individual Findings: Participants and Accomplices

Under Art. 135(2) (mere participation executing commands):
• Rosario C. Santos (alias Charing), courier-division out-post chief—7 years 4 months prision mayor.
• Lamberto Magboo, irregular courier checker—7 y




...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.

About Privacy Terms