G.R. No. L-42608 February 6, 1979
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. GAVINO TAMPUS JOVEN, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The case involves the rape of thirteen-year-old Bella Flores. On the night of June 11, 1972, while her parents were at the hospital, Bella was at home with her two younger brothers in Sitio Mamaylan, Butuan City. Their neighbor, Gavino Tampus Joven, arrived, pushed open the door under the pretext of borrowing a saw, and later refused to leave. He slept in the sala. In the early morning of June 12, Bella was awakened to find Gavino, naked, on top of her. He forcibly had carnal intercourse with her twice, threatening to kill her and her family if she reported the assault. Out of fear, Bella only confided in her parents twenty-seven days later, leading to a medical examination which confirmed old hymenal lacerations consistent with loss of virginity.
The defense presented an alibi, with Gavino claiming he was in Mainit, Surigao, approximately ninety kilometers away, at the time of the incident. This was corroborated by his brother and two other witnesses. The trial court convicted Gavino of rape, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering him to pay indemnity. On appeal, his counsel contested the trial court’s jurisdiction and the credibility of the prosecution’s evidence.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the trial court correctly convicted the appellant of rape based on the complainant’s testimony, despite the defense of alibi and jurisdictional challenges.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. On jurisdiction, the Court ruled that the action was properly commenced by the verified complaint for rape filed by the victim and her mother, complying with Article 344 of the Revised Penal Code and the Rules of Court. The subsequent information filed by the fiscal was valid, and it was not necessary for the complainants to sign the information itself.
On the merits, the Court found the appellant’s alibi inherently weak and unworthy of credence. It failed to meet the requisite of physical impossibility for the appellant to have been at the crime scene, as the distance of ninety kilometers was not insurmountable. The testimonies of the defense witnesses were discredited due to discrepancies and lack of convincing detail regarding the appellant’s presence in Mainit. In contrast, the testimony of the victim was deemed positive, clear, and convincing. The Court emphasized that a young, artless barrio girl would not fabricate a detailed account of such a harrowing experience, undergo medical examination, and endure a public trial without a compelling motive. No such sinister motive was shown by the defense. The crime was simple rape aggravated by dwelling, warranting the penalty of reclusion perpetua. The trial court’s judgment was affirmed.