G.R. No. L-51513 May 15, 1984
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FELICIANO GOROSPE and RUFINO BULANADI, accused-appellants.

FACTS

The case originated from a complaint for forcible abduction with rape filed by Anastacia de Jesus, a 14-year-old student, against Gerardo Fajardo, Rufino Bulanadi, and Feliciano Gorospe. After a preliminary investigation, the complaint was amended, dropping Fajardo and including Oscar Alvaran, and changing the incident date to September 25, 1974. The Municipal Court ordered the arrest of the accused. Bulanadi and Gorospe posted bail but failed to appear at the second stage of the preliminary investigation, leading to the case’s elevation to the Court of First Instance (CFI). An amended information was filed, charging Gorospe and Bulanadi, along with Alvaran (at large), with conspiring to abduct and rape de Jesus in Plaridel, Bulacan, and Talavera, Nueva Ecija. The trial proceeded in absentia for the accused, with multiple judges presiding due to transfers and inhibition. The trial court found Gorospe and Bulanadi guilty of rape, sentencing each to two perpetual penalties of reclusion perpetua and ordering them to pay indemnity.
The prosecution’s evidence established that on September 25, 1974, in Plaridel, Bulacan, Bulanadi waved a handkerchief at de Jesus, causing her dizziness, after which she was forced into a vehicle. She regained consciousness in a nipa hut in Talavera, Nueva Ecija, where she saw the appellants and Fajardo. She was forced to drink a drugged soft drink, lost consciousness, and awoke naked with pains, indicating sexual abuse. She was detained for nine days. The defense portrayed de Jesus as unchaste, but the court found this version contrived and incredible given her age and consistent testimony, which was corroborated by Fajardo, who was discharged as a state witness.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the guilt of accused-appellants Feliciano Gorospe and Rufino Bulanadi for the crime of forcible abduction with rape was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The legal logic centered on the credibility of the complainant’s testimony and the existence of conspiracy. The Court found the testimony of Anastacia de Jesus credible and consistent in its material points, despite minor inconsistencies attributable to her tender age and traumatic experience. Her affirmative narration, corroborated by Gerardo Fajardo, was deemed inspired by a quest for justice, not fabrication. The defense’s alternative narrative was rejected as contrived and implausible for a 14-year-old student.
On the substantive law, the Court agreed with the trial court’s finding of conspiracy among the appellants and their cohorts. In conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all; thus, each appellant was liable not only for the rape he personally committed but also for those committed by his co-conspirators. However, the Court modified the Solicitor General’s position regarding Fajardo’s acts. Since Fajardo was discharged from the complaint to become a state witness, his individual guilt was not judicially established; therefore, the appellants could not be held liable for any rape allegedly committed by him. The Court noted the presence of aggravating circumstances—use of a motor vehicle and commission of the crime in an uninhabited place—which would ordinarily warrant the death penalty, but due to lack of the necessary votes for its imposition, the penalty was reduced to reclusion perpetua. The indemnity and accessory penalties were sustained.