EN BANC

[G.R. No. 127572. January 19, 2000.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES , plaintiff-appellee, v s . SALVADOR

VILLAR , accused-appellant.

The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.

Public Attorney's Office for accused-appellant.

SYNOPSIS

Accused-appellant was charged in two separate Informations with rape committed

against Mary Ann Ramos, a child below 12 years old. After due trial, the Regional Trial
Court of Puerto Princesa City, Palawan convicted accused-appellant with two counts of
rape and imposed the penalty of death. Hence, this appeal.
In his brief, accused-appellant questioned the factual ndings of the trial court
concerning the credibility of the victim. Accused-appellant cited the inconsistency between
the victim's declaration in her sworn statement and her direct testimony in court as to the
exact time when she was rst raped by accused-appellant in 1993. Accused-appellant also
contended that the victim's testimony is unworthy of credence because of the inherent
improbability of her testimony that nobody in their house learned of the repeated abuse
that had been going which may be noticed from any unusual behavior on her part and in
spite of the fact that there were ve individuals sleeping side by side on the oor. In
addition, accused-appellant posited that he was not a guardian of the victim, hence, the
death penalty cannot be imposed upon him.
The Supreme Court found the materiality of the exact time the crime was committed
as a minor detail and not of great signi cance. The more important consideration is that
the declarations of the victim both in her sworn statement before the investigating police
o cer and in her testimony in court were consistent on the basic matters constituting the
elements of the crime charged. The Court likewise found no merit in accused-appellant's
contention that it was improbable that nobody witnessed the rapes despite the fact that
there were ve of them sleeping inside the same room where the offenses were allegedly
committed. In People vs. Ignacio, the Court held that: . . . . There is no rule that rape can be
committed only in seclusion. We have repeatedly declared that "lust is no respecter of time
and place," and rape can be committed in even the unlikeliest of places.
The Court, however, did not a rm the death sentence imposed by the trial court
because the special qualifying circumstance of being a guardian was not duly alleged in
the information. The Court, therefore, a rmed accused-appellant's conviction for two
counts of rape with modification as to the penalty imposed and award of damages.

SYLLABUS

1. REMEDIAL LAW; EVIDENCE; CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES; CANNOT BE

IMPEACHED BY DISCREPANCY BETWEEN WITNESSES' TESTIMONY IN COURT AND THEIR
AFFIDAVITS, AS TO MINOR DETAILS. — It may well be pointed out that not all kinds of
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 inconsistency of a witness render the witness' testimony unworthy of credence. Verily,
inconsistencies in minor details reinforce rather than weaken credibility (People vs. Del
Prado, 110 Phil. 1034 [1960]), and such inconsistencies do not materially impair the
credibility of the witness (People vs. Modelo, 35 SCRA 639 [1970]). Under the
circumstances of the case at bar, the Court nds the materiality of the exact time the
crime was committed as a minor detail and not of great signi cance. The more important
consideration is that the declarations of the victim both in her sworn statement before the
investigating police o cer and in her testimony in court, are consistent on the basic
matters constituting the elements of the crime charged. Besides, this Court has already
ruled that discrepancy between the witnesses' testimony in court and the a davits they
had previously signed, as to minor details regarding the commission of the crime, do not
constitute sufficient ground to impeach the credibility of said witnesses, where on material
and important points their declarations are consistent (People vs. Valera, 5 SCRA 910
[1962]).
2. ID.; ID.; ID.; RAPE VICTIM CANNOT BE EXPECTED TO REMEMBER EVERY
DETAIL OF THE APPALLING OUTRAGE. — The Court cannot impose the burden of
exactness in the victim's recollection of her harrowing experience more so in the present
case where the victim was an innocent and tender 9-year old lass when she was rst
raped. It is all the more understandable that the victim in the present case may have been
confused as to the exact details of each and every rape incident, considering that she
claimed she had been sexually ravished for more than 100 times in a span of one whole
year. It is in fact expected that such a victim would rather wish and even purposely forget
the abhorrent memories of every single occasion. This being the case, it would be exacting
too much should the Court demand a very accurate, detailed, and awless account of the
two occasions now subject of her charges out of the 100 occasions of forcible
intercourse. In People vs. Sagucio (277 SCRA 183 [1997]), where this Court faced the
same issue of alleged inconsistencies in the victim's narration, we held that errorless
testimony cannot be expected especially when a witness is recounting details of a
harrowing experience. A court cannot expect a rape victim to remember every detail of the
appalling outrage.
3. ID.; ID.; ID.; LACK OF CONCRETE EVIDENCE OF ANY UNUSUAL BEHAVIOR
DOES NOT PROVE THAT THERE WAS IN FACT NO SUCH UNUSUAL BEHAVIOR. — We nd
no competent evidence showing that the victim exhibited no unusual behavior during the
one-year period that she was being sexually abused by accused-appellant. The lack of
concrete evidence of any unusual behavior on record does not prove that there was in fact
no such unusual behavior. If accused-appellant wanted the court to consider such an
allegation, it was incumbent upon him to prove the same with competent evidence. The
fundamental rule is that upon him who alleges rests the burden of proof. He cannot simply
rely on the lack of evidence showing the contrary.
4. CRIMINAL LAW; RAPE; LUST IS NO RESPECTER OF TIME AND PLACE. — We
likewise nd no merit in accused-appellant's contention that it was improbable that
nobody witnessed the rapes despite the fact that there were ve of them sleeping inside
the same room where the offenses were allegedly committed. This argument is not new in
this jurisdiction. In fact, in People vs. Sangil (276 SCRA 532 [1997]), we noted, that: . . . the
commission of rape was concededly "improbable but not impossible. . . . In People vs.
Ignacio, we took judicial notice of the interesting fact that among poor couples with big
families living in small quarters, copulation does not seem a problem despite the presence
of other persons around them. Considering the cramped space and meager room for
privacy, couples perhaps have gotten used to quick and less disturbing modes of sexual
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 congresses which elude the attention of family members; otherwise, under the
circumstances, it would be almost impossible to copulate with them around even when
asleep. It is also not impossible nor incredible for the family members to be in deep
slumber and not be awakened while the sexual assault is being committed. One may also
suppose that growing children sleep more soundly than grown-ups and are not easily
awakened by adult exertions and suspirations in the night. There is no merit in appellant's
contention that there can be no rape in a room where other people are present. There is no
rule that rape can be committed only in seclusion. We have repeatedly declared that "lust is
no respecter of time and place," and rape can be committed in even the unlikeliest of
places.
5. ID.; STATUTORY RAPE; DEATH PENALTY; CANNOT BE IMPOSED WHERE
QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE THAT OFFENDER WAS A GUARDIAN OF THE VICTIM WAS
NOT ALLEGED IN THE INFORMATION. — Although the circumstances to qualify simple
rape to the heinous crime of rape, namely: (a) victim under 18 years old (the certi cate of
live birth — Exhibit "A" was admitted by the defense), and ( b ) the offender being a guardian,
were duly proven in the present case, these circumstance cannot be considered for
purposes of imposing the extreme penalty of death unless these were alleged in the
information. An examination of the two informations in the present case reveals that only
the qualifying circumstance that the child is under 12 was alleged. There was no allegation
that the offender was a guardian of the victim. To consider said circumstance as
qualifying, would constitute denial of the right of accused-appellant to due process and to
be informed of the charges against him. At best, such circumstance may only be treated
as a generic aggravating circumstance, which, in the case of simple statutory rape,
however, is inconsequential because the imposable penalty is the singular indivisible
penalty of reclusion perpetua.
6. CIVIL LAW; DAMAGES; MORAL DAMAGES AND CIVIL INDEMNITY; AWARDED
IN CASE AT BAR. — For each of the two counts of simple statutory rape, accused-appellant
may be held civilly liable for the amount of P50,000.00 by way of indemnity and an
additional P50,000.00 as moral damages.

DECISION

MELO , J : p

This Court is once again called upon to discharge the most awesome power in the
criminal justice system, where, by way of automatic review, it is mandated to determine
whether or not the extreme penalty of death per Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7659, more
commonly referred to as the Death Penalty Law, was correctly imposed by the trial court,
in this case by Branch 52 of the Regional Trial Court of the Fourth Judicial Region,
stationed at Puerto Princesa City, Palawan for the heinous crime of statutory rape
committed by a de facto guardian against his 10-year old ward. cda

Accused-appellant was charged in two separate Informations pertinently reading as

follows:
Criminal Case No. 11874
That on or about the 19th of January, 1994, at barangay Bucana,
Municipality of El Nido, Province of Palawan, Philippines and within the
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused with lewd design and by
means of force, intimidation, did then and there willfully and feloniously have
carnal knowledge with one Mary Ann Ramos, a child below 12 years old, against
her will and consent to her damage and prejudice.

(p. 8, Rollo.)
Criminal Case No. 11875
That sometime in the month of January, 1993 at barangay Bucana,
Municipality of El Nido, Province of Palawan, Philippines, and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused with lewd design and by
means of force, intimidation, did then and there willfully and feloniously have
carnal knowledge with one Mary Ann Ramos, a child below 12 years old, against
her will and consent to her damage and prejudice.
(p. 10, Rollo.)

The narration of facts by the trial court, supported as it is by the evidentiary record,
is hereby adopted, to wit:
Mary Ann Ramos is the eldest child of the spouses Danilo Ramos and
Jose na Recasa who were joined in wedlock in Masbate, on January 15, 1982.
Shortly thereafter, the spouses transferred residence to El Nido, Palawan, where in
barangay Bucana of the same town, Mary Ann was born to said spouses on April
7, 1983.

From Masbate, Danilo Ramos and Jose na Recasa-Ramos came to

Palawan with several others, among whom were the accused Salvador Villar and
his nephew identi ed only by his surname Ranilo. On getting to El Nido, Palawan,
the group all stayed in one house. After a while, however, Salvador Villar built a
house of his own in the island-sitio of Lalutaya, barangay Bucana, El Nido,
Palawan, and the spouses Danilo and Jose na Ramos lived with him in the same
house. Being more advanced in age than them, and though still a bachelor,
Salvador Villar had been regarded by the spouses as elder member of their family.
Mary Ann Ramos became of school age in 1989. The island-sitio of
Lalutaya where the Ramoses and other migrants from Masbate settled some
years back, however, was yet without a school. The school nearest to the
island-sitio is located in barangay Bucana, El Nido, Palawan. It was that school
were Mary Ann Ramos and other children of school ages from sitio Lalutaya go
to.
To provide the school children from sitio Lalutaya with a place to stay in
during school days, the Ramoses and Salvador Villa built a house where they
were to live in barangay Bucana, El Nido, Palawan. Recognizing the need for
someone to look after the welfare of the children and attend to their meals and all
household needs, their parents engaged the services of Salvador Villar to act as
their caretaker and some kind of a guardian.

In that capacity Salvador Villar conducts the school children on a banca

from sitio Lalutaya to Barangay Bucana late in the afternoon of every Sunday. He
stays with the children in barangay Bucana attending to the preparation of their
meals and other household chores during school days. He conducts them back to
sitio Lalutaya after dismissal from classes in the afternoon of every Friday.

The accused consistently acted as caretaker and guardian of Mary Ann

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 Ramos from the time she was enrolled in Grade I. By the start of school year
1993-1994, though, he had under his care in barangay Bucana, not only Mary Ann
but four (4) others, namely; Mae Ramos, a younger sister of Mary Ann; Liezl
Ranilo, and the brothers Ernie and Rene Maltos, all cousins of the Ramos sisters.
For some time all went well in the manner Salvador performed his duties as
guardian of the school children, until the happening of the incident which
provided the basis for the institution of the instant twin indictments.

The building serving some kind of a dormitory for Mary Ann and the four
(4) other school children with her is a structure of light materials with a oor area
measuring about 18 feet long and 16 feet wide. The walls are made of sawali, or
wooden buho (reed), and with roof of nipa shingles. Its oor, built about three (3)
feet above the ground, is made of bamboo slats.

The house they were living is so structured that it could be said to have two
(2) rooms. One room serves as bedroom while on one side of the other is the
place for the kitchen, and section for the dining room. Mary Ann and the two other
girls sleep side by side on mats spread on the oor in the bedroom while the boys,
Ernie and Rene Maltos, also sleep beside each other on another side of the room
close to the kitchen. Salvador Villar, on the other hand, sleeps on a bed close to
the two boys.

Roughly 10:00 o'clock, one evening about the middle of January, 1993, and
while all the four (4) other children with her were already asleep, Mary Ann noticed
Salvador Villar approached her and with a knife poked at her chest, undressed
her. Even as she struggled to prevent him from undressing her he also took off her
panty and made her lie down. She attempted to shout but he covered her mouth
with his hand. Then he laid on top of her and thereupon forcibly inserted his male
organ in her female genitalia. With his penis inside her private organ he executed
repeated pumping motions. The entry of his male organ in to her reproductive
organ, and his execution of the pumping motions, caused her intense pain which
made her momentary loss of consciousness.
When shortly after she regained consciousness, she felt pain in her female
organ. Realizing that her organ had been bleeding she became frightened. Just
then, Salvador Villar warned her not to tell anyone what happened or he will kill
her. (TSN, Roselyn N. Teologo, February 9, 1995, pp. 9-14.) Because of fear
instilled in her by that threat she refrained from telling anyone about what the
accused did to her.
That was not to be the last time the accused forcibly imposed his sexual
gratification on the complainant.

For a period of about a year thereafter the accused repeatedly had forcible
carnal knowledge of the complainant at intervals of more or less three days, or
about ten (10) times a month. He raped her so many times, about a hundred (100)
times, that she was unable to recall the precise dates of each assault on her.
Aside from the rst occasion which she recalled to have taken place one evening
about the middle of January, 1993, the only other occasion which took place also
in the house they were staying in barangay Bucana, El Nido, Palawan, was in the
evening of January 19, 1994. (TSN, Roselyn N. Teologo, June 9, 1995, pp. 14-23)
dctai

In the evening of January 19, 1994, the accused again forcibly had carnal
knowledge of the complainant. About 10:00 o'clock that evening, and after all the
other school children with Mary Ann have already been asleep, the accused
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 approached her and for nth time forcibly undressed her. Thereafter, he laid on top
of her and inserted his male organ into hers. With his penis inside her female
organ he executed pumping motions even as she struggled to free herself from
him. With his weight over her body and with a knife poked on her she was unable
to extricate herself.
Occasioned by the fear instilled in her by the threat to her life by the
accused, the repeated sexual assaults on the complainant by the said accused
would not have been disclosed to her parents were it not for another unusual
incident which may have some bearing to the successive commission of the
offenses herein charged.

As usual, on January 20, 1994, a Thursday, Salvador Villar cooked their

supper, and at dinnertime set the table for their meals. They ate their supper at
about 6:30 o'clock in the evening, as usual. Salvador Villar partook of the meal
with them and the children noticed that he was already drunk at the time. After
having been through eating, the children, as usual, cleared the table and washed
the dishes. Thereafter, Salvador Villar left and some time later the children went to
bed, without Salvador Villar having been back.
After the children have been asleep for some time they were awakened
when Salvador Villar came. On getting up the house, Salvador Villar drank water
rst then threw the water container out on the window. Afterwards, he went inside
the room where the children have been sleeping and in a drunken mode shouted:
"Nasan na Kayo, mga putang ina kayo!" On seeing him with a drawn bolo on hand
the children, overcame with fright, rose from bed, jumped out through the window
and proceeded together to, and took refuge in, the house of one Minda Mentos.
Ms. Mentos welcomed them and made them get up her house. After a while
Salvador Villar came, fetching them, but they did not go back with him. Instead,
they spent the night in the house of Minda Mentos to whom they related why they
jumped out through the window.
The children returned to their place of abode the following morning of
January 21, 1994. Salvador Villar prepared their breakfast that morning which
they partook with him. When asked while eating why he chased them the night
before, the accused told them that he was drunk and did not know what he was
doing.
Soon after Mary Ann Ramos was sexually abused by Salvador Villar, she
related to her 9-year old cousin, Liezl Ranilo, what the accused did to her. But Liezl
likewise refrained from disclosing it to their parents because she was likewise
afraid of the threat by the accused. It was that incident which made the children
jump out of the window which led to the disclosure by Mary Ann of the sexual
abuse on her by the accused.

As was the habit, after dismissal from their classes late in the afternoon of
Friday, January 21, 1994, the children proceeded home on a banca to their
parents in sitio Lalutaya, barangay El Nido, Palawan. Thru Liezl Ranilo, the
mother of Mary Ann Ramos learned about the incident which made them jump
out through the window. Thereupon, her mother asked Mary Ann why they jumped
out through the window and she related why, including what Salvador Villar had
been doing to her. Her mother spanked her. But the following morning they
proceeded to the town hall of El Nido and led a complaint for rape against
Salvador Villar. (TSN, Roselyn N. Teologo, 9 February, 1995, pp. 16-17)

Aside from ling a complaint, Mary Ann, accompanied by her mother, also
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 submitted for physical/medical examination by a physician on January 27, 1994.
Dr. Nestor A. Reyes of the District hospital of Taytay, Palawan, conducted that
examination and issued Medico Legal Certi cate, marked Exhibit "C", the full text
of which follows:

"Patient: Mary Ann Ramos, 10

years old residing at
barangay Bucana, El Nido,
Palawan
"Place of incident: Inside the room
(Residential)
"Date of incident: From January 1993 to
January 19, 1994
"Time of incident: Nighttime
"Place of treatment: Taytay District Hospital,
Taytay, Palawan
"Date of treatment: January 27, 1994
"Time of treatment: 3:30 PM
FINDINGS:
1. Breast undeveloped
2. Absence of pubic hair
3. Hymen with old healed lacerations at 6, 8, 9 and 12 o'clock
4. Vagina admits 1 finger easily.
REMARKS:
"— had possible
— sexual intercourse"

(pp. 18-24, Rollo.)

Accused-appellant imputes two errors upon the trial court for convicting him of two
counts of rape, to wit:
I
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY
BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF TWO COUNTS OF RAPE (IN JANUARY 1993
AND ON JANUARY 19, 1994) DESPITE THE IMPROBABLE AND INCONSISTENT
TESTIMONY OF THE COMPLAINING WITNESS.
II
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN CONVICTING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT IN
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 11874 AND SENTENCING HIM TO DEATH PURSUANT TO
SECTION 11 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7659 AMENDING ARTICLE 336 OF THE
REVISED PENAL CODE.

In his brief, accused-appellant resolutely questions the factual ndings of the trial
court concerning the credibility of the victim. For instance, accused-appellant cites the
inconsistency between the victim's declaration in her sworn statement and her direct
testimony in court as to the exact time when she was rst raped by accused-appellant in
1993.
The argument fails to persuade us.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 It may well be pointed out that not all kinds of inconsistency of a witness render the
witness' testimony unworthy of credence. Verily, inconsistencies in minor details reinforce
rather than weaken credibility (People vs. Del Prado, 110 Phil. 1034 [1960]), and such
inconsistencies do not materially impair the credibility of the witness (People vs. Modelo,
35 SCRA 639 [1970]). Under the circumstances of the case at bar, the Court nds the
materiality of the exact time the crime was committed as a minor detail and not of great
signi cance. The more important consideration is that the declarations of the victim both
in her sworn statement before the investigating police o cer and in her testimony in court,
are consistent on the basic matters constituting the elements of the crime charged.
Besides, this Court has already ruled that discrepancy between the witnesses' testimony in
court and the a davits they had previously signed, as to minor details regarding the
commission of the crime, do not constitute su cient ground to impeach the credibility of
said witnesses, where on material and important points their declarations are consistent
(People vs. Valera, 5 SCRA 910 [1962]).
Furthermore, the Court cannot impose the burden of exactness in the victim's
recollection of her harrowing experience more so in the present case where the victim was
an innocent and tender 9-year old lass when she was rst raped. It is all the more
understandable that the victim in the present case may have been confused as to the exact
details of each and every rape incident, considering that she claimed she had been sexually
ravished for more than 100 times in a span of one whole year. It is in fact expected that
such a victim would rather wish and even purposely forget the abhorrent memories of
every single occasion. This being the case, it would be exacting too much should the Court
demand a very accurate, detailed, and awless account of the two occasions now subject
of her charges out of the 100 occasions of forcible intercourse. In People vs. Sagucio (277
SCRA 183 [1997]), where this Court faced the same issue of alleged inconsistencies in the
victim's narration, we held that errorless testimony cannot be expected especially when a
witness is recounting details of a harrowing experience. A court cannot expect a rape
victim to remember every detail of the appalling outrage. cda

Accused-appellant also contends that the victim's testimony is unworthy of

credence because of the inherent improbability of her testimony that nobody in their house
learned of the repeated abuse that had been going which may be noticed from any unusual
behavior on her part and in spite of the fact that there were ve individuals sleeping side by
side on the floor.
The argument does not have much weight.
We nd no competent evidence showing that the victim exhibited no unusual
behavior during the one-year period that she was being sexually abused by accused-
appellant. The lack of concrete evidence of any unusual behavior on record does not prove
that there was in fact no such unusual behavior. If accused-appellant wanted the court to
consider such an allegation, it was incumbent upon him to prove the same with competent
evidence. The fundamental rule is that upon him who alleges rests the burden of proof. He
cannot simply rely on the lack of evidence showing the contrary.
We likewise nd no merit in accused-appellant's contention that it was improbable
that nobody witnessed the rapes despite the fact that there were ve of them sleeping
inside the same room where the offenses were allegedly committed. This argument is not
new in this jurisdiction. In fact, in People vs. Sangil (276 SCRA 532 [1997]), we noted that:
. . . the commission of rape was concededly "improbable but not
impossible . . .
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 I n People vs. Ignacio, we took judicial notice of the interesting fact that
among poor couples with big families living in small quarters, copulation does
not seem a problem despite the presence of other persons around them.
Considering the cramped space and meager room for privacy, couples perhaps
have gotten used to quick and less disturbing modes of sexual congresses which
elude the attention of family members; otherwise, under the circumstances, it
would be almost impossible to copulate with them around even when asleep. It is
also not impossible nor incredible for the family members to be in deep slumber
and not be awakened while the sexual assault is being committed. One may also
suppose that growing children sleep more soundly than grown-ups and are not
easily awakened by adult exertions and suspirations in the night. There is no
merit in appellant's contention that there can be no rape in a room where other
people are present. There is no rule that rape can be committed only in seclusion.
We have repeatedly declared that "lust is no respecter of time and place," and rape
can be committed in even the unlikeliest of places.
(pp. 539-540)

Finally, accused-appellant claims that the death penalty cannot be imposed upon
him under the provisions of Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7659 which pertinently
provides:
The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed
with any of the following attendant circumstances:
(1) when the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the
offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by
consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the
common-law-spouse of the parent of the victim.

He posits that he was not a guardian of the victim. He argues that he was a mere
employee of the victim's parents, spouses Danilo and Jose na Ramos, charged with the
duty of looking after the needs of their children Mary Ann and May Ramos, and likewise
given the task of conducting them by banca from Barangay Bucana to Sitio Lalutaya and
vice-versa to attend school. He further contends that he cannot be said to have the power,
control or authority over the person of Mary Ann Ramos which a guardian should have,
because it is still her parents who exercise the same over her. He insists that he served as
a mere companion of the children while they attended their classes.
There may be ample evidence on record to show that accused-appellant quali ed as
a guardian of the victim the way the lawmakers intended the word to be understood, but
the Court reserves its ruling on the issue considering that this special qualifying
circumstance of being a guardian was not duly alleged in the information.
The Court cannot a rm the death sentence imposed by the trial court anchored
upon the above-cited provision of the Death Penalty Law.
In People vs. Dela Cuesta (G.R. No. 126134, March 2, 1999), we held:
The seven modes of committing rape introduced under R.A. 7659 and R.A.
4111 which warrant the automatic imposition of death penalty partake of the
nature of a qualifying circumstance under the Revised Penal Code since it
increases the penalty of rape to one degree. As such, this qualifying circumstance,
that the child is under eighteen (18) and the offender is a guardian, should be
alleged in the information to be appreciated as such.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 (pp. 10-11)

Although the circumstances to qualify simple rape to the heinous crime of rape,
namely: (a) victim under 18 years old (the certi cate of live birth – Exhibit "A" was admitted
by the defense), and (b ) the offender being a guardian, were duly proven in the present
case, these circumstance cannot considered for purposes of imposing the extreme
penalty of death unless these were alleged in the information. An examination of the two
informations in the present case reveals that only the qualifying circumstance that the
child is under 12 was alleged. There was no allegation that the offender was a guardian of
the victim. To consider said circumstance as qualifying, would constitute denial of the right
of accused-appellant to due process and to be informed of the charges against him. At
best, such circumstance may only be treated as a generic aggravating circumstance,
which, in the case of simple statutory rape, however, is inconsequential because the
imposable penalty is the singular indivisible penalty of reclusion perpetua.
For each the two counts of simple statutory rape, accused-appellant may be held
civilly liable for the amount of P50,000.00 by way of indemnity and an additional
P50,000.00 as moral damages.
WHEREFORE, nding the conviction of accused-appellant for two counts of rape
justi ed by the evidence on record, the Court hereby AFFIRMS the decision of Branch 52 of
the Regional Trial Court, Fourth Judicial Region, stationed at Puerto Princesa City (a) in
Criminal Case No. 11875 sentencing accused-appellant to reclusion perpetua, with civil
indemnity of P50,000.00 in favor of the victim, with an ADDITIONAL P50,000.00 as moral
damages; and (b) in Criminal Case No. 11875 MODIFYING the sentence to reclusion
perpetua, also with civil indemnity of P50,000.00, and P50,000.00 as moral damages in
favor of the victim. Costs de oficio.
Cdpr

SO ORDERED.
Davide, Jr., C.J., Bellosillo, Puno, Vitug, Kapunan, Mendoza, Panganiban, Quisumbing,
Purisima, Pardo, Buena, Gonzaga-Reyes, Ynares-Santiago and De Leon, Jr., JJ., concur.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com