Title
Supreme Court
XXXvs. People
Case
G.R. No. 250219
Decision Date
Mar 1, 2023
Petitioner found guilty of psychological violence under RA 9262 for abandoning wife and child, causing emotional anguish through infidelity and denial of support.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 250219)

Procedural History

Petitioner was charged under Sec. 5(i) of R.A. 9262 for willfully depriving AAA and her minor child of financial support and abandoning them, causing psychological and emotional anguish. After arraignment and plea of not guilty, the RTC granted petitioner’s motion to quash the information for lack of preliminary investigation but later directed the prosecutor to conduct such investigation. Probable cause was affirmed, leading to trial on the merits. The RTC convicted petitioner, sentencing him to an indeterminate term of imprisonment and imposing a fine and counseling requirement. Petitioner appealed to the CA, which affirmed the conviction with an increased maximum penalty. His motion for reconsideration was denied, prompting this Rule 45 petition to the Supreme Court.

Facts of the Case

Petitioner and AAA married on December 29, 2006, and had a daughter, BBB. AAA went to Singapore for work in 2008. In May 2015, AAA discovered petitioner’s romantic involvement with CCC, who was later found pregnant with petitioner’s child. Petitioner and CCC sent harassing text messages to AAA. Upon learning that CCC was being brought to their hometown and that they were cohabiting, AAA returned to the Philippines and secured physical custody of BBB through the Department of Social Welfare and Development. BBB, then nine, testified tearfully about her father’s infidelity and her desire for parental reconciliation.

Version of the Prosecution

The prosecution presented documentary proof of marriage and birth, AAA’s affidavits and testimony regarding petitioner’s abandonment, and text-message excerpts showing marital infidelity and harassment. BBB corroborated emotional distress, crying as she recounted her father’s affair and her alienation from him. The prosecution argued that abandonment and denial of support constitute psychological violence under Sec. 5(i) of R.A. 9262.

Version of the Defense

Petitioner acknowledged paternity and marriage but maintained that AAA had primary custody and prevented him from supporting or seeing BBB, justifying cessation of any support. He initially denied knowing CCC but admitted a past school acquaintance. He contended that AAA alienated BBB and that there was no proof of deprivation of financial support or abandonment.

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court

The RTC found petitioner guilty of psychological violence by emotional and psychological abandonment under Sec. 5(i) of R.A. 9262, holding that emotional abandonment and infidelity inflicted greater harm than mere physical separation. Sentence imposed was an indeterminate term of two years, four months, and one day of prision correccional as minimum to six years and one day of prision mayor as maximum, a fine of ₱100,000, and mandatory psychological counseling.

Ruling of the Court of Appeals

The CA affirmed the RTC decision with modification of the maximum penalty to eight years and one day of prision mayor, emphasizing that Sec. 5(i) penalizes mental or emotional anguish caused by abandonment, public humiliation, repeated verbal abuse, denial of support or custody, or similar acts. It held that the information charged abandonment and deprivation of financial support, and that documentary and testimonial evidence established abandonment, marital infidelity, and resultant psychological harm to AAA and BBB.

Issue

Whether the CA erred in affirming the RTC’s conviction of petitioner for violating Sec. 5(i) of R.A. 9262 when psychological violence was not explicitly alleged in the information.

Elements of a Sec. 5(i) Violation

  1. Offended party is a woman and/or her child.
  2. Relationship: wife/former wife or woman with common child.
  3. Offender causes mental or emotional anguish.
  4. Means: public ridicule or humiliation, re

...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.