G.R. No. L-920; January 27, 1947
CHING JUAT, petitioner, vs. BONIFACIO YSIP, Judge of First Instance of Bulacan, respondent.

FACTS

Maria Ching (alias Avelina Ching) was found guilty by the respondent Judge of illegal marriage under Article 350 of the Revised Penal Code for marrying Co Heong on June 21, 1946, when she was only 16 years old, lacking the required age. Due to her minority, the sentence against her was suspended and her commitment to the Welfareville Correctional Institution was ordered. She appealed in due time. The respondent Judge issued an order on August 27, 1946, allowing her release on bail upon posting a P1,000 bond. The petitioner, Ching Juat (her father), challenges the validity of this bail order. He argues that by releasing the minor on bail, she was taken by her husband and co-accused Co Heong, and he was thereby illegally deprived of his patria potestas over his daughter.

ISSUE

Whether the respondent Judge acted within his legal power in allowing the minor accused, Maria Ching, to be released on bail pending her appeal.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the petition. The respondent Judge’s order granting bail was valid and within his legal power. A minor found guilty of a criminal offense in the lower court is not deprived of the right to appeal. The judgment and order of commitment under Article 80 of the Revised Penal Code are stayed and unenforceable until final and executory; an appeal suspends its effect. A minor who appeals is generally entitled, like any other accused, to provisional release on bail. There is no legal basis to exclude a minor from the constitutional and legal provisions on bail; a minor is entitled to more, not less, protection from the law. The petitioner’s claim of deprivation of patria potestas is without merit. The court’s affirmative action in granting bail cannot constitute a deprivation of a negative right. Furthermore, the petitioner’s daughter, upon her marriage, became emancipated from parental custody and transferred to her husband’s care, and the criminal offense of illegal marriage does not affect the marriage’s validity, which the petitioner does not contest.
CONCURRING OPINIONS:
* Justice Briones: Concurs with the dispositive portion solely on the ground that Maria Ching’s appeal raises a meritorious issue regarding her age (she alleges she was over 18 or was told so by her parents), so the lower court did not abuse its discretion in granting bail. He reserves opinion on whether a minor appellant has a right to bail when there is no controversy over age.
* Justice Tuason: Concurs, emphasizing that the constitutional right to bail applies to an accused minor. Confinement in a correctional or reformatory institution before final conviction, regardless of its stated purpose, inflicts similar moral and physical hardship as detention in a common jail and cannot justify denial of this right.