G.R. No. L-2695

FACTS:
The defendant-appellant, Domingo Ysip, a peddler from Pampanga, courted Jacinta Dichoso, a 17-year-old from Bacon, Sorsogon. With the consent of Jacinta’s mother but without the knowledge or consent of her father, Ysip arranged for Jacinta, her mother, and her two younger brothers to accompany him to his home province for the purpose of marriage. The group departed during the father’s absence. Two days later, the father overtook them in Sorsogon, filed a complaint for abduction (rapto), and brought his family home. Ysip was subsequently charged and convicted of abduction under Article 446 of the Penal Code.

ISSUE:
Whether the accused is guilty of the crime of abduction (rapto) as defined under Article 446 of the Penal Code, which requires that the taking of a maiden between 12 and 23 years old be done for immoral purposes (con miras deshonestas).

RULING:
No. The Supreme Court acquitted Domingo Ysip. The Court reiterated the established doctrine that an essential element of the crime of abduction under Article 446 is that the taking must be for immoral purposes (con miras deshonestas). The evidence presented failed to show any immoral motive on the part of the accused. On the contrary, the facts indicated a bona fide intent to marry: the accused secured the mother’s consent, the entire family (mother and siblings) accompanied them, and their conduct during the journey was exemplary. The Court found the trial judge’s presumption of improper motive unjustified, noting that the practical difficulties of securing a marriage without the father’s consent in their immediate locality explained the plan to marry in Ysip’s home province. The judgment of the trial court was reversed.