G.R. No. L-28716 November 18, 1970
FELIX CAISIP, IGNACIO ROJALES and FEDERICO VILLADELREY, petitioners, vs. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES and THE COURT OF APPEALS, respondents.

FACTS

Complainant Gloria Cabalag, wife of Marcelino Guevarra, cultivated Lot 105-A of Hacienda Palico. Her husband had lost a forcible entry case filed by the landowner, Roxas y Cia., and a writ of execution was served on June 6, 1959. The writ’s return stated possession was delivered to the hacienda through its overseer, accused Felix Caisip, and Guevarra was given twenty days from June 6 to vacate. On June 17, 1959, within this period, Gloria was weeding the ricefield on the lot. Caisip approached and told her to leave, but she refused, asserting her right to stay. Caisip then fetched police officers Ignacio Rojales and Federico Villadelrey, who had been assigned to the area upon the request of the hacienda administrator. Rojales and Villadelrey, upon Gloria’s continued refusal, grabbed her, twisted her hand to take her trowel, and forcibly dragged her, tearing her clothes, as Caisip stood nearby with a drawn gun. Gloria was taken to the municipal building but was later released. The defense claimed she was arrested for slander after insulting them and that she tore her own clothes. The trial court and the Court of Appeals credited the prosecution’s version.

ISSUE

Whether the acts of the petitioners (Caisip, Rojales, and Villadelrey) are justified under Article 429 of the New Civil Code, and whether they are guilty of the crime of grave coercion.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for grave coercion. Article 429 of the Civil Code, which allows an owner or lawful possessor to use reasonable force to repel or prevent an actual or threatened unlawful invasion or usurpation, was held inapplicable. Gloria Cabalag was not invading or usurping the property on June 17, 1959; she was merely remaining in possession, which she was explicitly allowed to do until June 26, 1959, under the sheriff’s writ of execution. The sheriff had also informed Caisip he could not eject her without a further court order. Her act of weeding was not a criminal offense and could even be considered beneficial. The petitioners, through violence and without legal authority, prevented Gloria from continuing her weeding, which constitutes the crime of grave coercion. All three petitioners acted with a community of purpose. The aggravating circumstances of abuse of superior strength and disregard of respect due to the offended party on account of her sex were present for all. For the police officers, the additional aggravating circumstance of taking advantage of their public position was present. The penalty imposed by the lower courts was affirmed.