View full case

GEORGE BONGALON v. PEOPLE

FACTS:

On June 26, 2000, the petitioner was charged with child abuse under Section 10(a) of Republic Act No. 7610. The Prosecution alleged that on May 11, 2000, the petitioner physically abused Jayson Dela Cruz, a twelve-year-old student, by striking him with his palm on the back and by slapping him on the face. The petitioner also allegedly uttered derogatory remarks to Jayson's family. Jayson suffered contusions as a result of the incident. The petitioner denied the allegations and claimed to have only confronted Jayson and his brother after his daughters reported that they were thrown stones at and that Jayson had burned his daughter's hair. He denied physically abusing Jayson or using derogatory language towards him. Mary Ann Rose, the petitioner's daughter, supported her father's testimony and denied throwing stones at Jayson.

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found the petitioner guilty of child abuse and sentenced him to imprisonment. On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The petitioner filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court, claiming innocence and arguing that his actions were meant to protect his daughters.

ISSUES:

  1. Did the petitioner's actions constitute child abuse under Republic Act No. 7610?

  2. Was the petitioner's filing of a petition for certiorari the proper remedy to assail the CA's affirmance of his conviction?

RULING:

  1. The petitioner's actions did not constitute child abuse under Republic Act No. 7610. The Court found that his actions were done at the spur of the moment and in anger, without the specific intent to debase, degrade, or demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of the child. Instead, the petitioner was found guilty of slight physical injuries under Article 266 (1) of the Revised Penal Code.

  2. The petitioner adopted the wrong remedy in assailing the CA's decision. The proper recourse should have been a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, not a petition for certiorari. However, the Court opted to treat his defective petition as an appeal in the interest of justice.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Certiorari vs. Appeal The special civil action for certiorari is intended for correcting errors of jurisdiction only, not errors of judgment. The proper recourse from a decision of the Court of Appeals is a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Revised Rules of Court.

  • Pro Reo Doctrine Any doubt in the commission of the crime should be resolved in favor of the accused.

  • Passion or Obfuscation A mitigating circumstance under Article 13 (6) of the Revised Penal Code, where the accused loses reason and self-control due to a legitimate provocation, thus reducing the exercise of their will power.

  • Indeterminate Sentence Law Not applicable if the penalty imposed does not exceed one year.

  • Moral Damages in Criminal Cases Moral damages may be awarded in criminal cases that result in physical injuries, as consistent with prevailing jurisprudence.