G.R. No. L-33446 August 18, 1972
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JOAQUINITO GAN, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The prosecution established that on the night of December 3, 1970, 14-year-old Alita Selosa was at her isolated home in Barrio Bambanin, Oriental Mindoro, with only her younger siblings. Her parents were away. The accused, Joaquinito Gan, a boarder in their house, entered the room where she slept. He awakened her, embraced her, and pressed a knife against her neck, threatening to kill her if she made an outcry. Overpowered by force and fear, her panties were torn, and he succeeded in having carnal knowledge of her. The following day, he prevented her from leaving the house, threatening to kill her siblings. Using the same intimidation and force, including a fist blow, he raped her again on the nights of December 4 and 5. In the early morning of December 7, with an accomplice, he dragged her from the house and confined her in another barrio until her father, with PC soldiers, located and rescued her based on the accused’s own admission.
The defense, relying solely on the accused’s uncorroborated testimony, claimed the sexual acts were consensual. He alleged a romantic relationship with Alita, claiming she was affectionate and even provoked his wife. He asserted that the incidents on the alleged dates were acts of mutual passion, not rape, and that her accusations were motivated by anger after his wife discovered them and after a subsequent quarrel.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the sexual intercourse between the accused and the complainant was consummated through force and intimidation, constituting the crime of rape, or whether it was with her consent as claimed by the defense.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for rape. The Court found the testimony of the young victim to be credible, natural, and consistent. Her detailed account of being threatened with a knife, physically overpowered, held captive, and repeatedly assaulted was corroborated by her prompt report to her father and the PC, her sworn statement, and the medical examination. The Court emphasized that in rape cases, the accused may be convicted solely on the credible testimony of the victim. The defense of consent was rejected as inherently improbable and unsupported by evidence. The Court held that the force and intimidation employed—the knife threat, the fist blow, the captivity, and the threats against her siblings—were more than sufficient to overpower her will and constitute the essential elements of rape. The use of a deadly weapon (the knife) was properly considered. With no aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the penalty of reclusion perpetua was correctly imposed. The award of moral damages was also sustained as recoverable in rape cases under the Civil Code.