Title
People vs. Nicolas Jaurigue and Avelina Jaurigue
Case
G.R. No. L-384
Decision Date
Feb 21, 1946
Avelina Jaurigue stabbed Amado Capina after repeated harassment, claiming self-defense of honor. Court found partial justification, reduced penalty due to provocation, voluntary surrender, and lack of intent to kill.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-384)

Procedural History

Avelina Jaurigue was found guilty of homicide by the Court of First Instance of Tayabas and sentenced to an indeterminate penalty ranging from seven years, four months, and one day of prision mayor to thirteen years, nine months, and eleven days of reclusion temporal, with accessory penalties including indemnity and half the costs. She appealed to the Court of Appeals for Southern Luzon, asserting errors related to the recognition of legitimate defense, mitigation of penalty, and the aggravating circumstance of the killing occurring in a sacred place.

Facts Established by Evidence

The evidence showed that Amado Capina had been courting Avelina without consent and committed multiple acts of harassment and physical assault, including a forcible embrace, unwanted touching, and a nocturnal intrusion into her bedroom with an apparent intent to rape. On the night of September 20, 1942, inside a brightly lit Seventh Day Adventist chapel, Amado brazenly touched Avelina’s thigh without consent. She stabbed him once with a fan knife she carried for protection, inflicting a mortal wound. Avelina immediately surrendered herself to the barrio lieutenant and cooperated fully with authorities.

Legal Principles on Defense of Honor and Use of Force by Women

The Court recognized the high value society places on a woman’s honor, equating it with a precious right deserving protection by all reasonable means, including deadly force when necessary. Precedents cited affirmed that an imminent threat of rape constitutes unlawful aggression justifying legitimate defense. Hence, a woman is entitled to kill to protect her honor if faced with actual danger of rape or gross sexual assault.

Application to the Case and Limitations of Justification

The Court held that if Avelina had killed Amado during the nocturnal intrusion into her bedroom on September 15, 1942, the killing would have been fully justified in self-defense. However, the stabbing inside the chapel on September 20, 1942, where multiple witnesses were present and the setting was lit and public, did not present a clear and impending danger of rape or serious assault. Therefore, her use of deadly force at that time was considered excessive and not fully excusable on the ground of legitimate defense of honor.

Mitigating Circumstances

The Court acknowledged several mitigating factors favoring Avelina:

  1. Immediate and unconditional surrender to authorities.
  2. Acting under grave provocation leading to passion and temporary loss of self-control.
  3. Lack of intent to kill, as evidenced by inflicting only a single wound aimed at punishing the offender’s hand.

Aggravating Circumstances Rejected

The prosecution’s claim that the offense was aggravated because it occurred in a place of worship was rejected due to absence of evidence proving premeditation or malicious intent while entering the chapel.

Conclusion on Criminal Liability and Penalty

The Court concluded that Avelina was guilty of homicide without aggravating circumstances, but with qualified mitigating circumstances entitling her to reduced penalty pursuant to Article 69 o

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.