G.R. No. 131942 ; October 5, 2000
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. CARLITO BAWANG, accused-appellant.

FACTS

The prosecution alleged that on September 19, 1995, in Siayan, Zamboanga del Norte, Carlito Bawang raped his 14-year-old daughter, Myrna. He ordered her to wash clothes at a creek, sent away her younger brother, and at knifepoint, forced her to have sexual intercourse. Myrna immediately reported the rape to her mother, Pacita, who observed her distressed state and blood-stained underwear. The incident was reported to police in December 1995. Medical examination confirmed Myrna’s hymen was not intact, consistent with sexual intercourse.
The defense presented an alibi. Carlito Bawang denied the accusation, claiming he was at home all day afflicted with boils on his feet and neck, which was corroborated by his sister and a neighbor. He asserted his family fabricated the charge. The trial court convicted him of rape under RA 7659 and imposed the death penalty.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting accused-appellant of rape despite the alleged weakness of the prosecution’s evidence.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua. The Court found the prosecution evidence conclusive. Myrna’s testimony was clear, credible, and consistent. She provided a detailed account of the rape, including the use of a knife and the specific threats made. Her immediate outcry to her mother and brother, and her emotional and physical state corroborated her claim. The medical findings, while noting an absence of fresh lacerations, supported the occurrence of sexual intercourse, with the physician explaining the hymen’s condition could be due to its elasticity.
The Court rejected the defense of alibi as inherently weak and unsubstantiated. It emphasized that denial cannot prevail over the positive and categorical testimony of the victim, especially in incestuous rape cases where the victim’s testimony is often the sole evidence. The relationship of father and daughter lent credibility to Myrna’s account, as it is highly improbable for a young daughter to accuse her own father falsely of a grave crime. The delay in reporting was sufficiently explained by the father’s threats, which paralyzed the family with fear. The penalty was reduced because the information failed to allege Myrna’s exact age with the requisite specificity to justify the death penalty under the law at the time.