Title
People vs. Rupal
Case
G.R. No. 222497
Decision Date
Jun 27, 2018
Accused-appellant Pedro Rupal convicted of raping a 13-year-old minor, AAA, in Bohol, Philippines. Medical evidence and AAA’s testimony corroborated forcible penetration; alibi and denial rejected. Supreme Court affirmed reclusion perpetua and awarded damages.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 222497)

Facts of the Case

The accused-appellant, Pedro Rupal, faced charges of Rape stemming from events on December 15, 2005, in a municipality in Bohol. The information submitted outlined that Rupal forcibly dragged AAA, a thirteen-year-old girl, towards a coconut plantation and had carnal knowledge of her without consent. Following the incident, AAA remained silent out of fear due to threats made by Rupal regarding her mother and siblings. After a similar event occurred in January 2006, AAA’s mother, BBB, learned of the incident, leading to a medical examination and police report that corroborated AAA’s testimony.

Prosecution's Version

On the day of the crime, AAA was at school when she was sent a message by Rupal under the pretense of delivering money. Upon meeting, he forcibly pulled her towards the plantation, where the sexual assault occurred. Despite her panic and resistance, Rupal threatened her, further instilling fear about divulging the events to her mother. Medical examinations later revealed physical evidence of rape, corroborated by the testimony from Dr. Analita N. Auza, who noted healed lacerations consistent with forcible entry.

Defense's Version

Rupal's defense consisted primarily of alibi, asserting that he was preoccupied with household chores and later fetching water during the time of the alleged crime. He claimed that he had no interaction with AAA that day, presenting a defense that rested on denial, which ultimately lacked corroboration. The defense argued that the allegations stemmed from familial disputes and were not credible.

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court (RTC)

The RTC found AAA's testimony to be convincing and credible, determining that Rupal’s defense lacked weight against the straightforward account provided by the victim. The RTC emphasized the inherent credibility afforded to the testimony of child victims and deemed Rupal guilty of the charges under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and awarding damages to AAA.

Ruling of the Court of Appeals (CA)

In affirming the RTC's decision, the CA upheld the judgment based on AAA’s credible testimony, reaffirming her narrative despite any alleged inconsistencies on collateral matters, such as the number of times the assaults occurred. The CA noted that the intimidation associated with Rupal's threats effectively suppressed AAA's initial disclosures about the abuse. Ultimately, the CA increased the amount of damages awarded to AAA, recognizing the heinous nature of the crime.

Issues Raised

  1. Whether the RTC erred in placing reliance on the credibility of AAA's testimony amidst alleged inconsistencies.
  2. Whether the accused-appellant was wrongfully convicted given the prosecution's failure to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Court's Ruling on Issues

The appeal presented was found to lack merit. The Court reiterated that the prosecution had suffici

...continue reading

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