GR 148228; (December, 2003) (Digest)
G.R. No. 148228; December 4, 2003
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. PAMPING PAINGIN, GITONG MALDUMAN, and THREE (3) JOHN DOES, accused. PAMPING PAINGIN, appellant.
FACTS
The prosecution’s evidence established that on May 3, 1995, in Barangay Paitan, Naujan, Oriental Mindoro, appellant Pamping Paingin, together with Gitong Malduman and three others, kidnapped 18-year-old Pati Panindigan. The victim’s mother, Elena Panindigan, testified that she saw appellant strike Pati on the neck with a piece of wood, causing him to fall. Appellant and his companions then carried the unconscious victim away towards a cogonal area. Another witness, Narding Aguniag, corroborated seeing appellant dragging Pati. The victim has never been found.
Appellant denied the accusation and interposed the defense of alibi. He claimed he was in a different municipality, Baco, harvesting palay with others at the time of the incident. He asserted he did not know the victim, his co-accused, or the victim’s mother prior to the case. He also testified about being tied to a tree for about 30 days by certain individuals after being accused.
ISSUE
Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of appellant Pamping Paingin for the crime of Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court found the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, particularly the victim’s mother who was an eyewitness, to be clear, credible, and consistent. Her positive identification of appellant as the one who struck and carried away her son was given full weight. The defense of alibi was correctly rejected as inherently weak and cannot prevail over the positive identification by credible witnesses. For alibi to prosper, the accused must prove not only that he was elsewhere when the crime occurred but that it was physically impossible for him to have been at the scene. Appellant failed to establish this physical impossibility, as the distance between the two municipalities was not shown to be insurmountable.
The crime committed is Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention under Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended. The elements are present: appellant, a private individual, deprived the victim of his liberty by carrying him away, and the detention was attended by the circumstance that serious physical injuries were inflicted upon the victim when he was struck unconscious. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was properly imposed. The award of moral damages to the victim’s mother in the amount of ₱100,000.00 was also sustained, justified by the severe emotional suffering caused by the victim’s disappearance.