GR 191320; (April, 2017) (Digest)
G.R. No. 191320 . April 25, 2017
JONA BUMATAY, PETITIONER, V. LOLITA BUMATAY, RESPONDENT.
FACTS
Respondent Lolita Bumatay was charged with bigamy for contracting a second marriage with Jose Bumatay on November 6, 2003, while her first marriage to Amado Rosete, solemnized on January 30, 1968, was allegedly still subsisting. The Information was filed by the public prosecutor upon the complaint-affidavit of petitioner Jona Bumatay, Jose’s foster daughter. During the pendency of the criminal case, Lolita filed a petition before a different Regional Trial Court (RTC) for the declaration of nullity of her marriage to Amado. In 2005, the RTC declared this first marriage void ab initio, finding that no valid ceremony occurred as Lolita’s sister had purportedly married Amado by proxy.
ISSUE
Whether the RTC in the bigamy case correctly granted Lolita’s Motion to Quash the Information based on the subsequent declaration of nullity of her first marriage.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of the bigamy case. The core legal principle is that a judicial declaration of nullity retroacts to the date of the marriage’s celebration. Following the precedent in Morigo v. People, the crime of bigamy under Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code requires that the accused must have been legally married under the first union. The RTC-Dagupan City’s final judgment declaring Lolita’s marriage to Amado void ab initio meant that, in the eyes of the law, no first marriage ever existed at the time she contracted the second marriage with Jose. Consequently, an essential element of the crime—a valid prior marriage—was conclusively absent. The Court rejected the petitioner’s argument that the bigamy case should proceed to trial to determine good faith, as the nullity declaration removed the very legal foundation of the charge. The prosecution of crimes is under the control of the public prosecutor, and here, the State, through the prosecutor, did not appeal the dismissal, which was based on a valid legal ground. Thus, the acquittal via the quashal was proper.