G.R. No. 188897. June 6, 2011.

* defloration; publicly admit having been ravished and her honor tainted; allow the
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. IRENO examination of her private parts; and undergo all the trouble and inconvenience,
BONAAGUA y BERCE, appellant. not to mention the trauma and scandal of a public trial, had she not in fact been
raped and been truly moved to protect and preserve her honor, and motivated by
Criminal Law; Rape; Guiding Principles in Rape Cases.—To determine the desire to obtain justice for the wicked acts committed against her. Moreover,
the innocence or guilt of the accused in rape cases, the courts are guided by three the Court has repeatedly held that the lone testimony of the victim in a rape case,
well-entrenched principles: (1) an accusation of rape can be made with facility if credible, is enough to sustain a conviction.
and while the accusation is difficult to prove, it is even more difficult for the Same; Same; No member of a rape victim’s family would dare encourage
accused, though innocent, to disprove; (2) considering that in the nature of the victim to publicly expose the dishonor to the family unless the crime was in
things, only two persons are usually involved in the crime of rape, the testimony fact committed, especially in this case where the victim and the offender are
of the complainant should be scrutinized with great caution; and (3) the evidence relatives.—Even Ireno’s contention that the charges against him were merely
for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot be allowed to fabricated by his wife because she suspects that he is having an affair with
draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense. another woman deserves scant consideration. Aside from the fact that the said
Same; Same; Witnesses; The Court has consistently held that in rape allegation was not proved, it must be emphasized that no member of a rape
cases, the evaluation of the credibility of witnesses is best addressed to the sound victim’s family would dare encourage the victim to publicly expose the dishonor
discretion of the trial judge whose conclusion thereon deserves much weight and to the family unless the crime was in fact committed, especially in this case
respect because the judge had the direct opportunity to observe them on the where the victim and the offender are relatives. It is unnatural for a mother to use
stand and ascertain if they were telling the truth or not.—Time and again, this her daughter as an engine of malice, especially if it will subject her child to
Court has consistently held that in rape cases, the evaluation of the credibility of embarrassment and lifelong stigma.
witnesses is best addressed to the sound discretion of the trial judge whose Same; Same; Affidavits of Desistance; Rape is no longer a crime against
conclusion thereon deserves much weight and respect because the judge had the chastity for it is now classified as a crime against persons—hence, pardon by
direct opportunity to observe them on the stand and ascertain if they were telling the offended party of the offender in the crime of rape will not extinguish the
the truth or not. Generally, appellate courts will not interfere with the trial court’s offender’s criminal liability.—Ireno cannot likewise rely on the Affidavit of
assessment in this regard, absent any indication or showing that the trial court Desistance stating that AAA and her mother are no longer interested in pursuing
has overlooked some material facts of substance or value, or gravely abused its the case filed against him. Rape is no longer a crime against chastity for it is now
discretion. classified as a crime against persons. Consequently, rape is no longer considered
Same; Same; Same; It is well-entrenched in this jurisdiction that when the a private crime or that which cannot be prosecuted, ex-
offended parties are young and immature girls, as in this case, courts are 622
inclined to lend credence to their version of what transpired, considering not
only their relative vulnerability, but also the shame and embarrassment to which 622 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
they would be exposed if the
People vs. Bonaagua
_______________
cept upon a complaint filed by the aggrieved party. Hence, pardon by the
* SECOND DIVISION. offended party of the offender in the crime of rape will not extinguish the
offender’s criminal liability. Moreover, an Affidavit of Desistance—even when
621 construed as a pardon in the erstwhile “private crime” of rape—is not a ground
for the dismissal of the criminal cases, since the actions have already been
VOL. 650, JUNE 6, 2011 621 instituted. To justify the dismissal of the complaints, the pardon should have
People vs. Bonaagua been made prior to the institution of the criminal actions.
matter about which they testified were not true.—It is well-entrenched in Same; Same; Same; The Court looks with disfavor on affidavits of
this jurisdiction that when the offended parties are young and immature girls, as desistance.—It has been repeatedly held by this Court that it looks with disfavor
in this case, courts are inclined to lend credence to their version of what on affidavits of desistance. As cited in People v. Alcazar, 630 SCRA 622
transpired, considering not only their relative vulnerability, but also the shame (2010), the rationale for this was extensively discussed in People v. Junio,  237
and embarrassment to which they would be exposed if the matter about which SCRA 826 (1994): x x x We have said in so many cases that retractions are
they testified were not true. A young girl would not usually concoct a tale of generally unreliable and are looked upon with considerable disfavor by the
courts. The unreliable character of this document is shown by the fact that it is conclusion, as an appeal in criminal cases throws the whole case open for
quite incredible that after going through the process of having the [appellant] review, it being the duty of the court to correct such error as may be found in the
arrested by the police, positively identifying him as the person who raped her, judgment appealed from. Since the CA found Ireno guilty of Acts of
enduring the humiliation of a physical examination of her private parts, and then Lasciviousness under Section 5 (b) of R.A. No. 7610 in Criminal Case No. 03-
repeating her accusations in open court by recounting her anguish, [the rape 0255 instead of rape, the Court should thus determine whether the evidence
victim] would suddenly turn around and declare that [a]fter a careful deliberation presented by the prosecution was sufficient to establish that the intentional
over the case, (she) find(s) that the same does not merit or warrant criminal touching of the victim by Ireno constitutes lascivious conduct and whether the
prosecution. Thus, we have declared that at most the retraction is an afterthought CA imposed the appropriate penalties.
which should not be given probative value. It would be a dangerous rule to reject Criminal Law; Child Abuse Law; Acts of Lasciviousness; Sexual Abuse;
the testimony taken before the court of justice simply because the witness who Elements; Before an accused can be convicted of child abuse through lascivious
gave it later on changed his mind for one reason or another. Such a rule [would] conduct committed against a minor below 12 years of age, the requisites for acts
make a solemn trial a mockery and place the investigation at the mercy of of lasciviousness under Article 336 of the RPC must be met in addition to the
unscrupulous witnesses. Because affidavits of retraction can easily be secured requisites for sexual abuse under Section 5 of R.A. No. 7610.—Before an
from poor and ignorant witnesses, usually for monetary consideration, the Court accused can be convicted of child abuse through lascivious conduct committed
has invariably regarded such affidavits as exceedingly unreliable. 624
Same; Same; Alibi and Denial; No jurisprudence in criminal law is more
settled than that alibi is the weakest of all defenses, for it is easy to contrive and 624 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
difficult to disprove, and for which reason it is generally rejected; Denial could People vs. Bonaagua
not prevail over complainant’s direct, positive and categorical assertion.— against a minor below 12 years of age, the requisites for acts of
Amidst the overwhelming evidence against him, Ireno offered nothing but his lasciviousness under Article 336 of the RPC must be met in addition to the
bare denial of the requisites for sexual abuse under Section 5 of R.A. No. 7610. Acts of
623 Lasciviousness, as defined in Article 336 of the RPC, has the following
elements: (1) That the offender commits any act of lasciviousness or lewdness;
VOL. 650, JUNE 6, 2011 623 (2) That it is done under any of the following circumstances:  a. By using force
People vs. Bonaagua or intimidation; or b. When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise
accusations against him and that he was someplace else when the dastardly unconscious; or c. When the offended party is under 12 years of age; and (3)
acts were committed. No jurisprudence in criminal law is more settled than that That the offended party is another person of either sex. In addition, the following
alibi is the weakest of all defenses, for it is easy to contrive and difficult to elements of sexual abuse under Section 5, Article III of R.A. No. 7610 must be
disprove, and for which reason it is generally rejected. It has been consistently established: 1. The accused commits the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious
held that denial and alibi are the most common defenses in rape cases. Denial conduct.  2. The said act is performed with a child exploited in prostitution or
could not prevail over complainant’s direct, positive and categorical assertion. subjected to other sexual abuse. 3. The child, whether male or female, is below
As between a positive and categorical testimony which has the ring of truth, on 18 years of age.
one hand, and a bare denial, on the other, the former is generally held to prevail. Same; Rape Through Sexual Assault; Like in the crime of rape whereby the
All said, as found by the CA, the prosecution has convincingly proved and more slightest penetration of the male organ or even its slightest contact with the
than sufficiently established that: (1) Ireno committed the accusations of Rape outer lip or the labia majora of the vagina already consummates the crime, in
Through Sexual Assault against AAA in Criminal Cases Nos. 03-0254, 03-0256, like manner, if the tongue, in an act of cunnilingus, touches the outer lip of the
and 03-0257; (2) that AAA was a minor when Ireno committed the sexual assault vagina, the act should also be considered as already consummating the crime of
against her; and (3) that Ireno was the biological father of AAA. rape through sexual assault, not the crime of acts of lasciviousness.—It must be
Criminal Procedure; Appeals; Verily, in criminal cases, an examination of emphasized, however, that like in the crime of rape whereby the slightest
the entire records of a case may be explored for the purpose of arriving at a penetration of the male organ or even its slightest contact with the outer lip or
correct conclusion, as an appeal in criminal cases throws the whole case open the labia majora of the vagina already consummates the crime, in like manner, if
for review, it being the duty of the court to correct such error as may be found in the tongue, in an act of cunnilingus, touches the outer lip of the vagina, the act
the judgment appealed from.—In criminal cases, an examination of the entire should also be considered as already consummating the crime of rape through
records of a case may be explored for the purpose of arriving at a correct sexual assault, not the crime of acts of lasciviousness. Notwithstanding, in the
present case, such logical interpretation could not be applied. It must be pointed 626 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
out that the victim testified that Ireno only touched her private part and licked it,
People vs. Bonaagua
but did not insert his finger in her vagina. This testimony of the victim, however,
The accusatory portion of the Information in Criminal Case No. 03-0254
is open to various interpretation, since it cannot be identified what specific part
against Ireno reads:
of the vagina was defiled by Ireno. Thus, in conformity with the principle that
“That on or about the month of December 1998 in the City of Las Piñas and
the guilt of an accused must be proven beyond reasonable doubt, the statement
within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with
cannot be the basis for convicting Ireno with the crime of rape through sexual
abuse of influence and moral ascendancy, by means of force, threat and
assault.
intimidation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously insert his
APPEAL from a decision of the Court of Appeals.625 tongue and finger into the genital of his daughter, [AAA], a minor then eight (8)
years of age, against her will and consent.
VOL. 650, JUNE 6, 2011 625 CONTRARY TO LAW and with the special aggravating/
People vs. Bonaagua qualifying circumstance of minority of the private offended party, [AAA], being
   The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court. then only eight (8) years of age and relationship of the said private offended
  Office of the Solicitor General  for appellee. party with the accused, Ireno Bonaagua y Berce, the latter being the biological
  Public Attorney’s Office  for appellant. father of the former.”3

PERALTA, J.: The Information in Criminal Case No. 03-0255 4 has the same accusatory
Ireno Bonaagua (Ireno) seeks the reversal of the Decision 1 of the Court of allegations while the Informations in Criminal Case Nos. 03-0256 5 and Criminal
Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 03133 convicting him with three (3) Case Nos. 03-02576 are similarly worded, except for the date of the commission
counts of Statutory Rape under Paragraph 2, Article 266-A of the Revised Penal of the crime and the age of AAA, which are December 2000 and ten (10) years
Code (RPC), as amended, in relation to Republic Act No. 7610 (R.A. No. 7610) old, respectively.
and Acts of Lasciviousness under Section 5 (b) of R.A. No. 7610. The cases were later consolidated 7 and upon his arraignment, Ireno pleaded
The factual and procedural antecedents are as follows: not guilty to the four (4) counts of rape with which he was charged.
In four (4) separate Informations, Ireno was charged by the Office of the City Consequently, trial on the merits ensued.
Prosecutor of Las Piñas City with four (4) counts of Rape under Paragraph 2, At the trial, the prosecution presented the testimonies of the victim, AAA; the
Article 266-A of the RPC, as amended, in relation to R.A. No. 7610, for victim’s mother; and Dr. Melissa De Leon. The defense, on the other hand,
inserting his tongue and his finger into the genital of his minor daughter, AAA.2 presented the lone testimony of the accused as evidence.
_______________ _______________

1 Penned by Associate Justice Mariano C. del Castillo (now a member of this 3 Records, Criminal Case No. 03-0254, pp. 4-5.
Court), with Associate Justices Isaias P. Dicdican and Ramon M. Bato, Jr., 4 Records, Criminal Case No. 03-0255, pp. 1-3
concurring; Rollo, pp. 2-19. 5 Records, Criminal Case No. 03-0256, pp. 1-3.
2 The identity of the victim or any information to establish or compromise 6 Records, Criminal Case No. 03-0255, pp. 1-3.
her identity, as well as those of her immediate family or household members, 7 Records, Criminal Case No. 03-0254, p. 39.
shall be withheld pursuant to Republic Act No. 7610, “An Act Providing for 627
Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection against Child Abuse, Exploitation
VOL. 650, JUNE 6, 2011 627
and Discrimination, and for Other Purposes”; Republic Act No. 9262, “An Act
Defining Violence against Women and Their Children, Providing for Protective People vs. Bonaagua
Measures for Victims, Prescribing Penalties Therefor, and for Other Purposes”; Evidence for the Prosecution
Section 40 of A.M. No. 04-10-11-SC, known as the “Rule on Violence against “The prosecution established that in 1998, AAA and her mother left their
Women and Their Children,” effective November 5, 2004; and People v. house in Candelaria, Quezon to spend the Christmas with accused-appellant in
Cabalquinto, G.R. No. 167693, September 19, 2006, 502 SCRA 419. Las Piñas City. They stayed in the house of a certain Lola Jean, the godmother in
the wedding of her parents, at Sta. Cecilia Subdivision, Las Piñas City.
626
 AAA was inside a room lying in bed one afternoon while her younger Accused-appellant asserted further that the charges of rape against him were
brothers were playing outside the house and her mother was not home. Accused- fabricated by AAA’s mother, who suspected him of having an affair with another
appellant entered the room. He approached her, rolled her shirt upward, and woman in Las Piñas City.”9
removed her shorts and panty. She tried to resist by putting her clothes back on,
but her father’s strength prevailed. Thereafter, accused-appellant touched and On August 6, 2007, the Regional Trial Court (RTC), after finding the
caressed her breasts. He licked her vagina then inserted his finger into it. evidence for the prosecution overwhelming against the accused’s defense of
In the evening of the same day, the accused-appellant raped AAA again in denial and alibi, rendered a Decision 10 convicting Ireno with four (4) counts of
the same manner and under the same circumstances. AAA did not tell her mother Rape, the dispositive portion of which reads:
that she was raped because accused-appellant threatened to kill her mother by “WHEREFORE, premises considered, there being proof beyond reasonable
placing the latter’s body in a drum and have it cemented if she would report the doubt that accused IRENO BONAAGUA, has committed four (4) counts of
incidents. She returned to Quezon with her mother before the end of the RAPE under par. 2 of Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, in
Christmas season. relation to R.A. 7610, as charged, the Court hereby pronounced him GUILTY
In December 1999, AAA was raped by accused-appellant for the third time and sentences him to suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA for each
when he went to Candelaria, Quezon. In December 2000, AAA and her mother case and to pay private complainant [AAA], the amount of Php50,000 for each
spent the Yuletide season with accused-appellant in Pulanglupa, Las Piñas City. case, or a total of Php200,000, by way of civil indemnity plus Php50,000 for
In a single day, AAA was raped for the fourth and fifth time. While spending the each case or a total of Php200,000 as moral damages.
afternoon inside her father’s room at the car-wash station, he removed her shorts Costs against the accused.
and panty then proceeded to touch and insert his finger into her vagina. Accused- _______________
appellant repeated the same sexual assault shortly thereafter. AAA again did not
report these incidents for fear that her mother would be killed and cemented 8  Rollo, pp. 4-6.
inside a drum. 9  Id., at pp. 6-7.
On January 26, 2001, AAA complained of severe abdominal pain which 10 CA Rollo, pp. 12-32.
prompted her mother to take her to Gregg Hospital in Sariaya, Quezon. AAA 629
was transferred to the Quezon Memorial Hospital in Lucena City where Dr.
Melissa De Leon performed on her a physical examination. The results revealed VOL. 650, JUNE 6, 2011 629
that there was a healed superficial laceration at the 9 o’clock position on the
People vs. Bonaagua
hymen of AAA. This medical finding forced AAA to reveal to her mother all the
      SO ORDERED.”11
incidents of rape committed by accused-appellant.628
Aggrieved, Ireno appealed the Decision before the CA, which appeal was
628 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED later docketed as CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 03133.
People vs. Bonaagua On March 31, 2009, the CA rendered a Decision 12 affirming the decision of
After being discharged from the hospital, AAA’s mother took her to the the RTC with modifications on the imposable penalty in Criminal Case Nos. 03-
Police Headquarters of Sariaya, Quezon to file a complaint for rape against 0254, 03-0256, and 03-0257, and finding Ireno guilty of Acts of Lasciviousness
accused-appellant. AAA’s mother also took her to the office of the National under Section 5 (b) of R.A. No. 7610, instead of Rape, in Criminal Case Nos. 03-
Bureau of Investigation in Legaspi City where she executed a sworn statement 0255, the decretal portion of which reads:
against accused-appellant.”8 “WHEREFORE, the Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Las Piñas
City, Branch 254, finding Ireno Bonaagua y Berce guilty beyond reasonable
Evidence for the Defense doubt of the crime of rape is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS:
“Accused-appellant denied committing the charges of rape hurled against 1. Ireno Bonaagua y Berce is hereby sentenced to suffer the
him. He claimed to be working in Las Piñas City while AAA, her mother and indeterminate penalty of 12 years of prision mayor, as minimum, to 20
siblings where (sic) in Sariaya, Quezon at the time the alleged rapes occurred. years of reclusion temporal, as maximum, for each rape in Criminal Case
While he admitted that there were times when AAA and her mother would visit Nos. 03-0254, 03-0256 and 03-0257 and is ordered to pay AAA the
him in Las Piñas City, he nonetheless averred that they would leave on the same amount of P25,000.00 as exemplary damages in each case, apart from the
day they arrived after he gives them money.
 civil indemnity and moral damages that have already been awarded by the 14 Id., at pp. 34-35.
trial court; 15  Id., at pp. 36-38; 41-43.
2.  Ireno Bonaagua y Berce is hereby held guilty beyond reasonable 16 CA Rollo, p. 52.
doubt of the crime of acts of lasciviousness in Criminal Case No. 03-
0255, with relationship as an aggravating circumstance. He is, 631
accordingly, sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of 12 years and VOL. 650, JUNE 6, 2011 631
1 day to 17 years and 4 months of reclusion temporal in its minimum and People vs. Bonaagua
medium periods and ordered to pay AAA the amount of PhP15,000 as Simply put, Ireno maintains that the testimony of AAA was replete with
moral damages and a fine of PhP15,000.00. inconsistencies and was extremely unbelievable. Ireno insists that the allegation
SO ORDERED.”13 that he inserted his tongue and finger into the genital of AAA was manifestly
incredible as the deed is physiologically impossible. Moreover, the medical
_______________
findings are grossly inconclusive to prove that AAA was raped, since it only
11 Id.,  at p. 32. established that there was only one healed superficial laceration.
12 Rollo, pp. 2-19. This Court, however, finds the arguments raised by Ireno untenable. To
13 Id., at pp. 18-19. determine the innocence or guilt of the accused in rape cases, the courts are
guided by three well-entrenched principles: (1) an accusation of rape can be
630 made with facility and while the accusation is difficult to prove, it is even more
630 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED difficult for the accused, though innocent, to disprove; (2) considering that in the
nature of things, only two persons are usually involved in the crime of rape, the
People vs. Bonaagua testimony of the complainant should be scrutinized with great caution; and (3)
In fine, the CA found Ireno’s defense of denial and alibi inherently weak the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot
against the positive identification of AAA that he was the culprit of the horrid be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.17
deed. Thus, aside from modifying the imposable penalty in Criminal Case Nos. After perusing the testimony of the victim, AAA, the prosecution has
03-0254, 03-0256 and 03-0257, the CA affirmed the decision of the RTC finding indubitably established that Ireno was the one who sexually assaulted her. AAA
Ireno guilty of the crime of Rape Through Sexual Assault. categorically narrated that Ireno sexually abused her on several occasions and
In Criminal Case No. 03-0255, however, after a diligent review of the even threatened AAA that he would kill her mother if she would report the
evidence adduced by the prosecution, the CA only found Ireno guilty of the incidents.
crime of Acts of Lasciviousness under Section 5 (b) of R.A. No. 7610. The CA Time and again, this Court has consistently held that in rape cases, the
opined that since the prosecution failed to establish the act of insertion by Ireno evaluation of the credibility of witnesses is best addressed to the sound discretion
of his finger into the vagina of AAA, Ireno could only be found guilty of Acts of of the trial judge whose conclusion thereon deserves much weight and respect
Lasciviousness, a crime which is necessarily included in the Information filed because the judge had the direct opportunity to observe them on the stand and
against him in Criminal Case No. 03-0255. ascertain if they were telling the truth or not. Generally, appellate courts will not
Ireno now comes before this Court for relief. interfere with the trial court’s
In a Resolution14 dated December 16, 2009, the Court informed the parties _______________
that they may file their respective supplemental briefs if they so desire. In their
respective Manifestations,15 the parties waived the filing of their supplemental 17 People v. Perez, G.R. No. 182924, December 24, 2008, 575 SCRA 653,
briefs and, instead, adopted their respective briefs filed before the CA. 664-665.
Hence, Ireno raises the lone error:
I 632
The COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED- 632 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
APPELLANT GUILTY OF THE CRIME OF RAPE DESPITE THE
People vs. Bonaagua
PROSECUTION’S FAILURE TO PROVE HIS GUILT BEYOND
assessment in this regard, absent any indication or showing that the trial court
REASONABLE DOUBT.16
has overlooked some material facts of substance or value, or gravely abused its
_______________ discretion.18
 It is well entrenched in this jurisdiction that when the offended parties are hymen is not easily lacerated and so a force exerted into it on several occasions
young and immature girls, as in this case, courts are inclined to lend credence to may cause only one laceration. Private complainant has thick and firm hymen
their version of what transpired, considering not only their relative vulnerability, and this may explain why there is only (sic) laceration on her hymen although
but also the shame and embarrassment to which they would be exposed if the she claimed her father inserted into her vagina his finger several times (pp. 19-
matter about which they testified were not true. 19 A young girl would not usually 29, supra).
concoct a tale of defloration; publicly admit having been ravished and her honor This non-categorical stance of Dr. De Leon is nonetheless understandable
tainted; allow the examination of her private parts; and undergo all the trouble because Dr. De Leon has no personal knowledge of what actually happened to
and inconvenience, not to mention the trauma and scandal of a public trial, had private complainant that she (complainant) suffered hymenal laceration.
she not in fact been raped and been truly moved to protect and preserve her However, there is one thing very certain though in the testimony of Dr. De Leon
honor, and motivated by the desire to obtain justice for the wicked acts —that she medically examined [AAA], herein private complainant, because of
committed against her.20 Moreover, the Court has repeatedly held that the lone the information that [AAA] was sexually abused by her [AAA’s] own father (pp.
testimony of the victim in a rape case, if credible, is enough to sustain a 5-6, supra). And indeed, as already discussed lengthily above, there is no reason
conviction.21 to doubt the veracity of AAA’s allegation.”22
Moreover, contrary to Ireno’s contention, the medical findings of Dr. Melissa
De Leon did not refute AAA’s testimony of defilement, but instead bolstered her The same conclusion was also arrived at by the CA, to wit:
claim. The RTC correctly concluded: “While the medico-legal findings showed a single healed superficial
“It is true that Dr. Melissa De Leon, when called to the witness stand to laceration on the hymen of AAA, Dr. De Leon clarified that it is not impossible
substantiate the same medical certification, did not rule out the possibility that for a hymen to sustain only one laceration despite the fact that a finger had been
the laceration might have been inflicted through some other causes and that there inserted into the vagina on several accounts. This situation may arise depending
could have been only one instance of finger insertion into the vagina of private on the force extended into the vagina and on whether or not the hymen of the
complainant. However, victim is membranous or firm and thick. A membranous hymen is easily
_______________ lacerated; thus, when a force is exerted into it on several occasions, several
lacerations may occur. On the other hand, a thick and firm hymen is not easily
18 People v. Alcazar, G.R. No. 186494, September 15, 2010, 630 SCRA 622, lacerated; a force exerted into it on several occasions may cause only one
632. laceration. According to Dr. De Leon, AAA
19 Flordeliz v. People, G.R. No. 186441, March 3, 2010, 614 SCRA 225, _______________
234.
20 People v. Matunhay, G.R. No. 178274, March 5, 2010, 614 SCRA 307, 22 CA Rollo, pp. 29-30.
316-317. 634
21 Id., at p. 317, citing People v. Quiñanola, 366 Phil. 390; 306 SCRA 710
(1999). 634 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
633 People vs. Bonaagua
has thick and firm hymen and this may explain why it has only one laceration
VOL. 650, JUNE 6, 2011 633 despite her claim that accused-appellant inserted his finger inside her vagina
People vs. Bonaagua several times.”23
it is equally true that Dr. De Leon also did not rule out the possibility that finger Even Ireno’s contention that the charges against him were merely fabricated
insertion might have been the cause of the laceration (pp. 7-12, TSN, January 31, by his wife because she suspects that he is having an affair with another woman
2006). Dr. De Leon also clarified that only one laceration may be inflicted deserves scant consideration. Aside from the fact that the said allegation was not
although a finger is inserted into the vagina on separate instances (pp. 19- proved, it must be emphasized that no member of a rape victim’s family would
26, supra). According to Dr. De Leon, this instance depends on the force exerted dare encourage the victim to publicly expose the dishonor to the family unless
into the vagina and on whether or not the hymen is membranous or firm and the crime was in fact committed, especially in this case where the victim and the
thick. A membranous hymen is easily lacerated and so when a force is exerted offender are relatives.24 It is unnatural for a mother to use her daughter as an
into it on several occasions, several lacerations may occur. A thick and firm
engine of malice, especially if it will subject her child to embarrassment and testimony taken before the court of justice simply because the witness who gave
lifelong stigma.25 it later on changed his mind for one reason or another. Such a rule [would] make
Also, Ireno cannot likewise rely on the Affidavit of Desistance stating that a solemn trial a mockery and place the investigation at the mercy of
AAA and her mother are no longer interested in pursuing the case filed against unscrupulous witnesses. Because affidavits of retraction can easily be secured
him. from poor and ignorant witnesses, usually for monetary consideration, the Court
Rape is no longer a crime against chastity for it is now classified as a crime has invariably regarded such affidavits as exceedingly unreliable.”31
against persons.26 Consequently, rape is no longer considered a private crime or
that which cannot be prosecuted, except upon a complaint filed by the aggrieved _______________
party. Hence, pardon by the offended party of the offender in the crime of rape
will not extinguish the offender’s criminal liability. Moreover, an Affidavit of 27 People v. Montes, 461 Phil. 563, 584; 416 SCRA 103, 121 (2003).
Desistance—even when construed as a pardon in the erstwhile “private crime” of 28 Rollo, p. 11.
rape—is not a ground for the dismissal of the criminal cases, since the actions 29 Supra note 18, at pp. 635-636.
have already been instituted. To justify the dismissal of the complaints, the 30 G.R. No. 110990, October 28, 1994, 237 SCRA 826.
pardon should have been 31 Id., at p. 834. (Emphasis omitted.)
_______________ 636
23 Rollo, pp. 11-12. 636 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
24 People v. Flores, 448 Phil. 840, 855-846; 400 SCRA 677, 689 (2003). People vs. Bonaagua
25 People v. Ibarrientos, 476 Phil. 493, 512; 432 SCRA 424, 438 (2004). Amidst the overwhelming evidence against him, Ireno offered nothing but
26 Republic Act No. 8353. his bare denial of the accusations against him and that he was someplace else
when the dastardly acts were committed. No jurisprudence in criminal law is
635 more settled than that alibi is the weakest of all defenses, for it is easy to contrive
VOL. 650, JUNE 6, 2011 635 and difficult to disprove, and for which reason it is generally rejected. 32 It has
People vs. Bonaagua been consistently held that denial and alibi are the most common defenses in
made prior to the institution of the criminal actions. 27 As correctly concluded by rape cases. Denial could not prevail over complainant’s direct, positive and
the CA, the said affidavit was executed in connection with another accusation of categorical assertion. As between a positive and categorical testimony which has
rape which Ireno committed against AAA in Candelaria, Quezon and not the the ring of truth, on one hand, and a bare denial, on the other, the former is
four cases of rape subject of this appeal. In addition, AAA’s mother testified that generally held to prevail.33 All said, as found by the CA, the prosecution has
she executed the said affidavit to regain custody of her children who were convincingly proved and more than sufficiently established that: (1) Ireno
brought to Bicol by Ireno’s siblings.28 committed the accusations of Rape Through Sexual Assault against AAA in
It has been repeatedly held by this Court that it looks with disfavor on Criminal Cases Nos. 03-0254, 03-0256, and 03-0257; (2) that AAA was a minor
affidavits of desistance. As cited in People v.  Alcazar,29  the rationale for this was when Ireno committed the sexual assault against her; 34 and (3) that Ireno was the
extensively discussed in People v. Junio:30 biological father of AAA.35
“x x x We have said in so many cases that retractions are generally unreliable Verily, in criminal cases, an examination of the entire records of a case may
and are looked upon with considerable disfavor by the courts. The unreliable be explored for the purpose of arriving at a correct conclusion, as an appeal in
character of this document is shown by the fact that it is quite incredible that criminal cases throws the whole case open for review, it being the duty of the
after going through the process of having the [appellant] arrested by the police, court to correct such error as may be found in the judgment appealed
positively identifying him as the person who raped her, enduring the humiliation from.36 Since the CA found Ireno guilty of Acts of Lasciviousness under Section
of a physical examination of her private parts, and then repeating her accusations 5 (b) of R.A. No. 7610 in Criminal Case No. 03-0255 instead of rape, the Court
in open court by recounting her anguish, [the rape victim] would suddenly turn should thus determine whether the evidence presented by the prosecution was
around and declare that [a]fter a careful deliberation over the case, (she) find(s) sufficient to establish that the intentional touching of the victim
that the same does not merit or warrant criminal prosecution. _______________
Thus, we have declared that at most the retraction is an afterthought which
should not be given probative value. It would be a dangerous rule to reject the
 32 People v. Balunsat, G.R. No. 176743, July 28, 2010, 626 SCRA 77, 97- 638
98.
33 Supra note 20, at p. 317. 638 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
34 Record, Criminal Case No. 03-0254, pp. 48 and 107. People vs. Bonaagua
35 Id.; TSN, June 13, 2006, p. 6. victim is under twelve (12) years of age shall be reclusion temporal in its
36 Gelig v. People, G.R. No. 173150, July 28, 2010, 626 SCRA 48, 49. medium period.”38
637 Paragraph (b) punishes sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct not only with
VOL. 650, JUNE 6, 2011 637 a child exploited in prostitution, but also with a child subjected to other sexual
People vs. Bonaagua abuses. It covers not only a situation where a child is abused for profit, but also
by Ireno constitutes lascivious conduct and whether the CA imposed the where one—through coercion, intimidation or influence—engages in sexual
appropriate penalties. intercourse or lascivious conduct with a child. 39However, pursuant to the
As aptly found by the CA: foregoing provision, before an accused can be convicted of child abuse through
“A diligent review of the evidence adduced by the prosecution, however, lascivious conduct committed against a minor below 12 years of age, the
shows that accused-appellant cannot be held guilty as charged for the crime of requisites for acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 of the RPC must be met in
rape in Criminal Case No. 03-0255. The prosecution failed to establish insertion addition to the requisites for sexual abuse under Section 5 of R.A. No. 7610.40
by accused-appellant of his finger into the vagina of AAA, who testified on Acts of Lasciviousness, as defined in Article 336 of the RPC, has the
direct examination that accused-appellant “touched my private part and licked following elements:
it but he did not insert his finger inside my vagina.” In fact, even the trial court (1) That the offender commits any act of lasciviousness or lewdness;
asked AAA if accused-appellant inserted his finger inside her vagina. She (2) That it is done under any of the following circumstances:
answered in the negative and averred that he licked her vagina and touched her a. By using force or intimidation; or
breasts. In reply to the prosecution’s query if accused-appellant did anything else b. When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise
aside from licking her organ, she said he also touched it. During cross- unconscious; or
examination, AAA testified that accused-appellant “merely touched her vagina c. When the offended party is under 12 years of age; and
but did not insert his finger.”37 (3) That the offended party is another person of either sex.41

Section 5 (b), Article III of R.A. No. 7610, defines and penalizes acts of _______________
lasciviousness committed against a child as follows:
“Section 5. Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse.—Children, 38 Emphasis supplied.
whether male or female, who for money, profit, or any other consideration 39 Flordeliz v. People, supra note 19, at p. 240.
or due to the coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or group, indulge in 40 Navarrete v. People, G.R. No. 147913, January 31, 2007, 513 SCRA 509,
sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct, are deemed to be children exploited in 517.
prostitution and other sexual abuse. 41 Flordeliz v. People, supra note 19, at pp. 240-241; Navarrete v. People,
xxxx supra.
(b) Those who commit the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious 639
conduct with a child exploited in prostitution or subject to other sexual
VOL. 650, JUNE 6, 2011 639
abuse; Provided, That when the victims is under twelve (12) years of age, the
perpetrators shall be prosecuted under Article 335, paragraph 3, for rape and People vs. Bonaagua
Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as amended, the Revised Penal Code, for rape or In addition, the following elements of sexual abuse under Section 5, Article
lascivious conduct, as the case may be: Provided, That the penalty for lascivious III of R.A. No. 7610 must be established:
conduct when the 1. The accused commits the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct.
_______________ 2. The said act is performed with a child exploited in prostitution or
subjected to other sexual abuse.
37 Rollo, p. 13. (Emphasis theirs). 3. The child, whether male or female, is below 18 years of age.42
 Corollarilly, Section 2 (h) of the rules and regulations 43 of R.A. No. 7610 beyond reasonable doubt, the statement cannot be the basis for convicting Ireno
defines “Lascivious conduct” as: with the crime of rape through sexual assault.
“[T]he intentional touching, either directly or through clothing, of the genitalia, Penalties and Award of Damages
anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks, or the introduction of any object into Having found Ireno guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Rape Through Sexual
the genitalia, anus or mouth, of any person, whether of the same or opposite sex, Assault in Criminal Case Nos. 03-0254, 03-0256, and 03-0257 and Acts of
with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual Lasciviousness in Criminal Case No. 03-0255, We shall proceed to determine the
desire of any person, bestiality, masturbation, lascivious exhibition of the appropriate penalties imposable for each offense.
genitals or pubic area of a person.”44 Criminal Case Nos. 03-0254, 03-0256, and 03-0257
Under Article 266-B of the RPC, the penalty for rape by sexual assault
Undeniably, all the afore-stated elements are present in Criminal Case No. is reclusion temporal “if the rape is committed by any of the 10
03-0255. Ireno committed lascivious acts against AAA by touching her breasts aggravating/qualifying circumstances mentioned in this article.” 46 In Criminal
and licking her vagina and the lascivious or lewd acts were committed against Case Nos. 03-0254, 03-
AAA, who was 8 years old at the time as established by her birth _______________
certificate.45 Thus, the CA correctly found Ireno guilty of the
_______________ 46 ART. 266-B. Penalties.—x x x
42 Malto v. People, G.R. No. 164733, September 21, 2007, 533 SCRA 643, 641
656; Navarrete v. People, supra note 40, at 521; Olivarez v. Court of Appeals, VOL. 650, JUNE 6, 2011 641
503 Phil. 421, 431; 465 SCRA 465, 473 (2005).
People vs. Bonaagua
43 Rules and Regulations on the Reporting and Investigation of Child Abuse
0256, and 03-0257, the aggravating/qualifying circumstance of minority and
Cases (adopted on October 11, 1993).
relationship are present, considering that the rape was committed by a parent
44 Flordeliz v. People, supra note 19, at p. 241, citing Navarrete v.
against his minor child. Reclusion temporal ranges from twelve (12) years and
People, supra note 40, at pp. 521-522; Olivarez v. Court of Appeals, supra note
one (1) day to twenty (20) years.
42, at pp. 431-432; pp. 473-474; People v. Bon, 444 Phil. 571, 584; 396 SCRA
Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the maximum term of the
506, 515 (2003).
indeterminate penalty shall be that which could be properly imposed under the
45 Record, Criminal Case No. 03-0254, p. 107.
RPC. Other than the aggravating/qualifying circumstances of minority and
640 relationship which have been taken into account to raise the penalty to  reclusion
640 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED temporal,47 no other aggravating circumstance was alleged and proven. Hence,
the penalty shall be imposed in its medium period, 48 or fourteen (14) years, eight
People vs. Bonaagua (8) months and one (1) day to seventeen (17) years and four (4) months.
crime of Acts of Lasciviousness under Section 5 (b) of R.A. No. 7610. On the other hand, the minimum term of the indeterminate sentence should
It must be emphasized, however, that like in the crime of rape whereby the be within the range of the penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by
slightest penetration of the male organ or even its slightest contact with the outer the Code which is prision mayor or six (6) years and one (1) day to twelve (12)
lip or the labia majora of the vagina already consummates the crime, in like years.49 Thus, Ireno should be meted the indeterminate penalty of ten (10) years
manner, if the tongue, in an act of cunnilingus, touches the outer lip of the of prision mayor, as minimum, to seventeen (17) years and four (4) months
vagina, the act should also be considered as already consummating the crime of of reclusion temporal, as maximum.
rape through sexual assault, not the crime of acts of lasciviousness. It must be clarified, however, that the reasoning expounded by the Court in
Notwithstanding, in the present case, such logical interpretation could not be the recent case of People v. Armando Chingh y Parcia,50 for imposing upon the
applied. It must be pointed out that the victim testified that Ireno only touched accused the higher penalty provided in Section 5 (b), Article III of R.A. No.
her private part and licked it, but did not insert his finger in her vagina. This 7610, has no application in the case at bar. In the said case, the
testimony of the victim, however, is open to various interpretation, since it _______________
cannot be identified what specific part of the vagina was defiled by Ireno. Thus,
in conformity with the principle that the guilt of an accused must be proven xxxx
 1. When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is circumstances which were not present in the Chingh case, which in turn,
a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity warrants the imposition of the higher penalty of re-
within the third civil degree, or the common law spouse of the parent of the 643
victim. VOL. 650, JUNE 6, 2011 643
47 Flordeliz v. People, supra note 19, at p. 243.
People vs. Bonaagua
48 Revised Penal Code, Art. 64, Par. 1.
clusion temporal prescribed by Article 266-B of the RPC. Considering that the
49 Supra note 19, at p. 243.
RPC already prescribes such penalty, the rationale of unfairness to the child
50 G.R. No. 178323, March 16, 2011, 645 SCRA 573.
victim that Chingh wanted to correct is absent. Hence, there is no more need to
642 apply the penalty prescribed by R.A. No. 7610.
642 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED As to civil liabilities, the damages awarded in the form of civil indemnity in
the amount of P50,000.00 and moral damages, also in the amount of P50,000.00,
People vs. Bonaagua for each count of Rape must be both reduced to P30,000.00, respectively, in line
Court, acknowledging the fact that to impose the lesser penalty would be unfair with current jurisprudence.51 Also, the amount of exemplary damages awarded in
to the child victim, meted upon the accused the higher penalty of reclusion the amount of P25,000.00 must be increased to P30,000.00 for each count of
temporal  in its medium period as provided in Section 5 (b), Article III of R.A. Rape.52
No. 7610, instead of the lesser penalty of prision mayor prescribed by Article Criminal Case No. 03-0255
266-B for rape by sexual assault under paragraph 2, Article 266-A of the RPC. It is beyond cavil that when the sexual abuse was committed by Ireno, AAA
The Court elucidated: was only eight (8) years old. Hence, the provisions of R.A. No. 7610, or The
“In this case, the offended party was ten years old at the time of the Special Protection of Children against Child Abuse, Exploitation and
commission of the offense. Pursuant to the above-quoted provision of law, Discrimination Act, should be applied.
Armando was aptly prosecuted under Art. 266-A, par. 2 of the Revised Penal Thus, the appropriate imposable penalty should be that provided in Section 5
Code, as amended by R.A. No. 8353, for Rape Through Sexual Assault. (b), Article III of R.A. No. 7610, which is reclusion temporal in its medium
However, instead of applying the penalty prescribed therein, which is prision period which is fourteen (14) years, eight (8) months and one (1) day to
mayor, considering that VVV was below 12 years of age, and considering further seventeen (17) years and four (4) months. As the crime was committed by the
that Armando’s act of inserting his finger in VVV’s private part undeniably father of the offended party, the alternative circumstance of relationship should
amounted to lascivious conduct, the appropriate imposable penalty should be that be appreciated. In crimes against chastity, such as Acts of Lasciviousness,
provided in Section 5 (b), Article III of R.A. No. 7610, which is reclusion relationship is always aggravating.53 Therefore, Ireno should be meted the
temporal  in its medium period. indeterminate penalty of thirteen (13) years, nine (9) months and
The Court is not unmindful to the fact that the accused who commits acts of _______________
lasciviousness under Art. 366 in relation to Section 5 (b), Article III of R.A. No.
7610, suffers the more severe penalty of reclusion temporal  in its medium period 51 People v. Alfonso, G.R. No. 182094, August 18, 2010, 628 SCRA 431,
than the one who commits Rape Through Sexual Assault, which is merely 452-453.
punishable by prision mayor. This is undeniably unfair to the child victim. To be 52 Id., at p. 452, citing People v. Lindo, 627 SCRA 519, 533 (2010).
sure, it was not the intention of the framers of R.A. No. 8353 to have disallowed 53 People v. Montinola, G.R. No. 178061, January 31, 2008, 543 SCRA 412,
the applicability of R.A. No. 7610 to sexual abuses committed to children. 432.
Despite the passage of RA No. 8353, R.A. No. 7610 is still good law, which
must be applied when the victims are children or those “persons below eighteen 644
(18) years of age or those over but are unable to fully take care of themselves or 644 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
protect themselves from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or discrimination
People vs. Bonaagua
because of a physical or mental disability or condition.”
eleven (11) days of reclusion temporal, as minimum, to sixteen (16) years, five
In the present case, the factual milieu was different since the offender, Ireno, (5) months and ten (10) days of reclusion temporal, as maximum.
is the father of the minor victim. Hence, the offenses were committed with the Moreover, the award in the amount of P15,000.00 as moral damages and a
aggravating/qualifying circumstances of minority and relationship, attendant fine in the amount of P15,000.00, is proper in line with current
jurisprudence.54 However, civil indemnity ex delicto  in the amount of 55 Flordeliz v. People, supra note 19, at p. 243; People v. Palma, 463 Phil.
P20,000.00 should also be awarded.55 In view of the presence of the aggravating 767; 418 SCRA 365 (2003).
circumstance of relationship, the amount of P15,000.00 as exemplary damages 56 Flordeliz v. People, supra.
should likewise be awarded.56
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Decision of the Court of Appeals, 645
dated March 31, 2009 in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 03133, is AFFIRMED with VOL. 650, JUNE 6, 2011 645
MODIFICATIONS: People vs. Bonaagua
1. In Criminal Case Nos. 03-0254, 03-0256, and 03-0257, IRENO SO ORDERED.
BONAAGUA y BERCE is hereby sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty Carpio (Chairperson), Nachura, Abad and Mendoza, JJ., concur.
of ten (10) years of prision mayor, as minimum, to seventeen (17) years and four
(4) months of reclusion temporal,  as maximum, for each count. He is likewise Judgment affirmed with modifications.
ordered to pay AAA the amounts of P30,000.00 as civil indemnity, P30,000.00
Notes.—The accused is only liable for attempted rape where the fact
as moral damages, and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages for each count of
remains, based on complainant’s own narrative, that accused’s penis was merely
Qualified Rape Through Sexual Assault or a total of P90,000.00 for each count.
on top of her vagina and did not actually enter the same. (People vs. Monteron,
2. In Criminal Case No. 03-0255, IRENO BONAAGUA y BERCE is
378 SCRA 340 [2002])
meted to suffer the indeterminate penalty of thirteen (13) years, nine (9) months
Any review of a rape case begins with the settled reality that accusing a
and eleven (11) days of reclusion temporal,  as minimum, to sixteen (16) years,
person of this crime can be done with facility. (People vs. Carpio, 508 SCRA
five (5) months and ten (10) days of reclusion temporal, as maximum. In
604 [2006])
addition to moral damages and fine, he is likewise ordered to pay P20,000.00 as
Since the crime of rape is essentially one committed in relative isolation or
civil indemnity and P15,000.00 as exemplary damages.
even secrecy, hence, it is usually only the victim who can testify with regard to
_______________
the fact of the forced coitus. (People vs. Ramos, 550 SCRA 656 [2008])
——o0o——
54 Id.; People v. Candaza, G.R. No. 170474, June 16, 2006, 491 SCRA
280; Olivares v. Court of Appeals, supra note 42.