G.R. No. L-21734 September 5, 1975
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ABELARDO SUBIDO, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The defendant-appellant, Abelardo Subido, was convicted of libel by the Court of First Instance of Manila and sentenced to imprisonment, a fine, and indemnity, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency. On appeal, the Court of Appeals modified the judgment by eliminating the prison term, affirming the P500.00 fine, and reducing the indemnity to P5,000.00. The dispositive portion of the appellate decision did not explicitly reiterate the provision for subsidiary imprisonment. Upon remand for execution, Subido moved for the cancellation of his appeal bond, arguing he could not be subjected to subsidiary imprisonment because the modified judgment did not expressly order it. The trial court denied his motion, ruling that subsidiary imprisonment was implied by law in case of non-payment of the fine. Execution efforts against his property were also initiated but met with a third-party claim.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the accused-appellant can be compelled to suffer subsidiary imprisonment for failure to pay the fine and indemnity imposed by the Court of Appeals, despite the modified decision’s silence on such subsidiary liability.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s orders with modification. The Court ruled that subsidiary imprisonment for non-payment of the fine is imposed by operation of law under Article 39 of the Revised Penal Code and does not require express stipulation in the judgment. Since the Court of Appeals imposed only a fine as the principal penalty, the legal consequence of subsidiary personal liability in case of insolvency attaches automatically. The law itself provides the rule that when only a fine is imposed for a less grave felony like libel, subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed six months. Therefore, the lower court correctly held Subido liable for subsidiary imprisonment should he fail to pay the fine. However, the Court modified the ruling regarding the indemnity. Subsidiary imprisonment applies only to the non-payment of a fine that is part of the criminal penalty, not to the civil liability for indemnity. Consequently, Subido may be required to suffer subsidiary imprisonment for non-payment of the P500.00 fine, but not for the P5,000.00 indemnity. The civil indemnity must be satisfied through ordinary civil execution proceedings against his property.