G.R. No. 108584 December 22, 1994
People of the Philippines vs. Petronilo Abapo

FACTS

Accused-appellant Petronilo Abapo was convicted of two counts of rape against Merlyn Navalon and Cherry Lyn Navalon, sisters who were 11 and 10 years old, respectively, at the time of the incidents in 1989. The prosecution evidence established that Abapo, the common-law partner of the victims’ mother, Carmenia Manliclic, sexually assaulted Merlyn in January 1989 in Digos, Davao del Sur, by covering her mouth and threatening to kill her family. He raped Cherry Lyn in late September or early October 1989 through force and intimidation. The victims’ testimonies were consistent and detailed, corroborated by medical certificates showing healed hymenal lacerations.
The defense presented a denial and alleged fabrication, arguing the complaints were instigated by the victims’ father. Abapo also raised multiple procedural issues, including an illegal arrest, the planting of evidence (a gun and bullets) seized without a warrant, and attempted extortion by the arresting officer and complainants. He further contended that the rape of Merlyn was incredible as it allegedly occurred while her siblings were nearby.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the trial court erred in convicting Abapo of two counts of statutory rape despite the defense’s allegations of fabrication, procedural irregularities in his arrest and the seizure of evidence, and the incredibility of the victims’ accounts.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court emphasized that the crimes were statutory rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, where carnal knowledge with a woman under twelve years of age is punishable. The sole essential element is carnal knowledge, which was conclusively proven through the credible, candid, and consistent testimonies of the young victims, corroborated by medical findings. The defense of denial cannot prevail over the positive identification and straightforward narration of the victims.
The Court dismissed the procedural objections as extraneous. Any irregularity in the arrest was deemed waived upon the filing of a petition for bail. The alleged illegal seizure of the gun and bullets was immaterial, as these items were not necessary to prove the statutory rape. The claim of extortion was found to be self-serving and baseless. The Court also found the defense’s alternative theories—that the rapes were fabricated or that the victims lost their virginity to their brother—to be inconsistent and unsupported, further undermining the appellant’s credibility. The awards for damages were modified, reducing moral damages and deleting exemplary damages, but the penalties of reclusion perpetua for each count were upheld.