G.R. No. 192912 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. DEMOCRITO PARAS, ACCUSED-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE , all the foregoing considered, this Court finds the guilt of the accused DEMOCRITO PARAS to have been proved beyond peradventure of a reasonable doubt and he is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA and to indemnify the offended party [AAA] the sum of P50,000.00 by way of compensatory damages plus the amount of P100,000.00 as and for moral damages. [13] The Decision of the Court of Appeals On appeal, the Court of Appeals upheld the judgment of the RTC in a Decision dated February 2, 2010. The appellate court affirmed the trial courts appreciation of AAAs testimony, which was held to be steadfast and unyielding throughout the direct and cross-examinations. The testimony of Luisa Paras on the alleged misunderstanding between the accused-appellant and Sergio Agua was found to be insufficient to overturn the candid testimony of AAA and her positive identification of the accused-appellant as the malefactor. The Court of Appeals also brushed aside the accused-appellants arguments of alleged inconsistencies and improbabilities in AAAs testimony, i.e ., that AAA could recall the details of the rape but not the birth date of her child and the name of her neighbor, that AAA did not seize the opportunities given her to save herself, and that the supposed date of the rape was not clearly established by the prosecution evidence. The appellate court ruled that said inconsistencies were on inconsequential matters that did not bear upon the essential elements of the crime of rape. The Court of Appeals decreed: WHEREFORE , premises considered the Decision dated October 18, 2005 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 29, Toledo City, in Criminal Case No. TCS-2729 is hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION . As modified, accused-appellant is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of qualified rape as defined and penalized in Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7659, and is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua . Accused-appellant is ordered to pay the private complainant the amount of P50,000.00 only as moral damages plus exemplary damages in the amount of P25,000.00. The award of civil indemnity in the amount of P50,000.00 stands. [14] The Ruling of the Court The accused-appellant again appealed his case to this Court, arguing that the trial court erred in convicting him of the crime charged even if his guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt. [15] The appeal lacks merit. As the accused-appellant was charged to have committed the rape in March 1996 or for sometime subsequent thereto, the applicable provision of the law in this case is Article 335 [16] of the Revised Penal Code. [17] The relevant portions of said statutory provision read: Art. 335. When and how rape is committed . - Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances: 1. By using force or intimidation; 2. When the woman is deprived of rea