University of Santo Tomas - Faculty of Civil Law

Case Digest in Torts and Damages – Atty. Mauricio Ulep

Class 3D (AY 2021 – 2022)

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. The scenario was broken by the voice of
ALEJANDRO BAJAR, Appellant. Alejandro, who was still obviously very drunk, NOTES:
G.R. No. 143817| inquiring whether his wife was in the house.
While speaking his demand, he pushed the
FACTS: That on or about the 16th day of main door to gain entry into the house, but he
August 1999, at about 8:00 oclock in the was not able to enter. Aquilio answered that
evening, the above named accused, then armed his wife was in their (Alejandros) house.
with a sharp bolo, with intent to kill, and with Alejandro accused Aquilio of lying and of
evident premeditation, and treachery, did then hiding his daughter. Aquilio told Alejandro to
and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously go home. Silence thereafter ensued.
stab one 85 year old Aquilio Tiwanak,
accused’s father-in-law, hitting him on the Suddenly, Ana heard a sound and saw that
different parts of his body, which caused his Alejandro was able to enter the house through
instantaneous death, to the damage and the kitchen door. He was carrying a bolo and
prejudice of the heirs of Aquilio Tiwanak in approaching her grandfather. She saw her
such amounts as may be allowed by law. father hack her grandfather, who was lying on
the bed. She got up, ran towards the sala, and
The aggravating circumstances of dwelling, saw her father still hacking his grandfather.
taking advantage of superior strength, She yelled for her father to stop. While he was
disregard of the respect due the victim on being stabbed and attacked, Aquilio stood up
account of his age, habitual intoxication and to embrace his son-in-law. Ana shouted for
relationship attended the commission of the help as she held down the hand which her
crime. father used to wield the bolo. Alma witnessed
these two last scenes. She saw her sister Ana
Upon his arraignment, Alejandro pleaded not trying to stay the hand of their father which
guilty, and trial thereafter ensued. The held the bolo, and Aquilio embracing Alejandro
prosecution presented witnesses, to testify on while being hacked by the latter.
the events surrounding the commission of the
crime. Lolita, having heard the cries of her daughter,
came to her fathers house. There, she saw
Ana Bajar Rabor, a resident of Wao, Bukidnon, Aquilio embracing Alejandro. She then
visited her parents in their house in Sitio instructed Ana to hold on to Alejandro while
Mohon, Mambayaan, Balingasag, Misamis she looked for a piece of wood with which to
Oriental. At around 3:00 p.m. of that day, her hit him. With the piece of wood she found, she
father Alejandro arrived home already very struck Alejandros head three times. Alejandro
drunk. At 5:00 p.m., Anas mother, Lolita Bajar, fainted. By this time, Aquilio slowly sank down
suggested that since her father was very drunk, to the floor and drew his last breath Lolita
she should sleep at the house of her maternal forthwith went outside to seek the help of
grandfather, the victim Aquilio, just one neighbors. Anas uncle, Tating Aganap, arrived
hundred meters away from the house of Lolita. and later brought two policemen, who
handcuffed Alejandro. ry
That night, at around 8:00 p.m., Ana was
listening to the radio while lying on the floor of The prosecutions last witness was Dr. Angelita
the bedroom in his grandfathers house. With Enopia, the Health Officer of Balingasag,
her were her 1-year-old daughter, Maybe Ann; Misamis Oriental. She confirmed the findings
her 11-year-old sister, Alma Bajar; and her 2- she made on the postmortem examination she
year-old niece, May Joy Labandia. She was conducted on the cadaver of Aquilio and on the
lying on the side of a wall that separated the death certificate she issued. She claimed that
bedroom from the sala. This wall was made of Aquilio suffered three big wounds: one on the
bamboo splits with holes or gaps in between maxilliary area on the right cheek which was
such that she could clearly see her grandfather slanting towards the mouth, one on the
lying on his bed in the sala. A gas lamp lit up anterior chest left side downwards to the
the bedroom, while another hung on the wall armpit, and one straight to the scapular area at
near the foot of the bed of her the back. She opined that the injuries were
grandfather.8crä lä wvirtualibrä ry probably caused by a sharp object such as a
bolo or a knife.

1
 University of Santo Tomas - Faculty of Civil Law
Case Digest in Torts and Damages – Atty. Mauricio Ulep
Class 3D (AY 2021 – 2022)

The defense presented Alejandro as its lone ISSUE: Whether the conviction of Alenjandro
witness. Alejandro testified that on the date Bajar was correct NOTES:
and time in question, he left his two daughters,
Ana and Alma, and his two grandchildren, RULING: YES. We affirm Alejandros conviction.
Mary Joy and Ann-Ann, at his house. He
proceeded to his father-in-laws house to look We affirm Alejandros conviction.
for his wife. Upon arrival, he greeted Aquilio
with respect: Pa, good evening. The latter
Settled is the rule that when the credibility of
replied that Lolita was not there and invited
witnesses is in issue, appellate courts generally
him (Alejandro) to go up and see for himself.
defer to the findings of the trial court,
Alejandro went up, and not finding his wife,
considering that the latter is in a better
said: She is not here  Pa. Aquilio angrily
position to decide the question after having
retorted: Everytime you are drunk you come
heard the witnesses and observed their
here to ask me. Aquilio then suddenly clubbed
deportment and manner of testifying during
Alejandro on the head with a 2 x 3 coco lumber
the trial. There are some exceptions to this
he saw near the door.
rule, such as when the evaluation was reached
arbitrarily or when the trial court overlooked,
Alejandro then touched his head, and saw misunderstood, or misapplied some facts or
blood on his hand. He felt dizzy. Seeing that circumstances of weight and substance which,
Aquilio was about to attack him again, he drew if considered, would affect the result of the
out his hunting knife and defended himself by case. Not one of these exceptions is present in
moving his hand from the right to left. He felt this case.
he hit something before he lost consciousness.
He regained consciousness at the Northern
We affirm, therefore, the trial courts
Mindanao Medical Center and discovered that
imprimatur of credence to the testimonies of
a policeman brought him there for the
prosecution witnesses Lolita, Ana and Alma (all
treatment of his head wound. He was found to
surnamed Bajar), who corroborated each
have sustained sutured wound 4 cm. left
others testimonies on material points. Ana
temporo-occipital area; lacerated wound 3 cm.
clearly saw through the gaps in the bamboo
left alteral neck area and confluent abrasion 3
walls and by going to the sala how her father
pts. 1 x 1 cm. 2 x 1 cm. and 1 x 1 cm., left knee,
stealthily entered her grandfathers house,
with seven days healing period.
surreptitiously approached his sleeping
grandfather, and surprised the latter to
Alejandro was later brought to the Balingasag wakefulness by his bolo hackings. Lolita heard
Municipal Jail, where he was visited by his two and then responded to Anas shouts for help.
children and wife. On their respective visits, Seeing how Ana was trying to prevent her
they informed him that Aquilio was already father from further attacking her grandfather,
dead. He cried when he learned the news, and Lolita helped her by clubbing her husbands
begged for his wifes forgiveness. head with a piece of coconut lumber. Ana and
Alma corroborated their mothers account on
RTC - the trial court found Alejandro guilty this matter.
beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged
against him, with treachery as the qualifying Thus, we agree with the trial courts
circumstance. It concluded that his observation that Alejandros uncorroborated
uncorroborated and unsubstantiated self- self-defense theory could not stand against the
defense theory was self-serving and could not positive, categorical, spontaneous, and
stand over the positive, categorical, straightforward declarations of his daughters
spontaneous, and straightforward declarations and wife. A plea of self-defense cannot be
of his daughters and wife on how Aquilio was justifiably appreciated, especially when
killed. It was convinced that no wife in her uncorroborated by independent and
right mind would testify in a heinous crime competent evidence or when it is extremely
against her husband, and no daughter in her doubtful by itself.
right mind would testify in a heinous crime
against her father, unless the crime charged is
By invoking self-defense, Alejandro had the
true.
burden of proving the existence of the
following essential requisites: (1) unlawful
2
 University of Santo Tomas - Faculty of Civil Law
Case Digest in Torts and Damages – Atty. Mauricio Ulep
Class 3D (AY 2021 – 2022)

aggression on the part of the victim; (2) sleep. Even Ana was undisturbed by the
reasonable necessity of the means employed to exchange of words, for she remained in the NOTES:
prevent or repel the unlawful aggression; and bedroom lying down and ready to sleep.
(3) lack of sufficient provocation on the part of Aquilio and his grandchildren had no inkling
the accused. This he miserably failed to do. In that Alejandro would trespass his dwelling by
fact, the records clearly establish that he was entering through the kitchen door. Aquilio was
the aggressor. Without unlawful aggression on completely unaware of the impending attack
the part of the victim, there can be no viable and, ultimately, his doom. And suddenly,
self-defense. Alejandro hacked him on the face as he was
lying down resting on his bed. The means,
Besides, Alejandros version of their family method, and form of the attack in this case
tragedy invites only misgiving. His allegation were, therefore, consciously adopted and
that Aquilio suddenly clubbed him with a piece effectively forestalled Aquilio from employing
of coco lumber he saw on the side of the door is a defense against his attacker.
not only doubtful. It was also refuted as
fictitious by the prosecution witnesses Dwelling aggravates a felony where the crime
testimony that it was Lolita who looked for a was committed in the dwelling of the offended
piece of wood to thwart him from what seemed party, who has not given any provocation. It is
a continuous attack on Aquilio. His alleged use considered aggravating primarily because of
of the hunting knife was likewise disproved by the sanctity of privacy the law accords to
the prosecution witnesses who testified to human abode. He who goes to anothers house
having seen him use a bob to attack the to hurt him or do him wrong is more guilty
defenseless Aquilio. than he who offends him elsewhere. Aquilio
did not provoke Alejandro; it was Alejandro
Since an unsubstantiated self-defense is similar who rudely and drunkenly interrupted the
in many respects to a bare denial, we can say quiet and restful evening Aquilio was enjoying.
that as between categorical testimonies that He even attempted to enter the house without
ring of truth on one hand, and an being invited and without the door being
unsubstantiated self-defense on the other, the opened for him. Clearly, because of his
former is generally held to prevail. The drunken condition, he was not welcome. After
veracity of this legal principle is enhanced in Aquilio told him to go home, a certain quietude
this case by the fact that the wife and children descended into the night, a lull which
of Alejandro were the ones who testified Alejandro used as a cover to pursue his plan to
against him. kill Aquilio. He doubly violated the sanctity of
Aquilios abode when he trespassed it by
We shall now discuss the trial courts entering through the kitchen door and then
appreciation of the different aggravating killing Aquilio.
circumstances.
Suffice it is to say that the alternative
For treachery to be appreciated, the offender circumstance of relationship was correctly
must have employed means, methods, or forms appreciated, the victim being the father-in-law
in the execution of any of the crimes against of the appellant.
persons that tend directly and especially to
ensure its execution without risk to himself With regard to the alternative circumstance of
arising from the defense which the offended intoxication, which the trial court treated as
party might make. Two elements must concur: aggravating, we find that it has not been shown
(1) the means of execution employed gives the to be habitual or intentional as required by
person attacked no opportunity to defend Article 15 of the Revised Penal Code. Lolita
himself or retaliate; and (2) the means of testified that her husband would drink liquor
execution was deliberately or consciously once a week but was not a frequent drinker.
adopted. She also admitted that on that fateful day, there
was a fiesta celebration at Barangay
Treachery was proved by Anas testimony. She Mambayaan. As Alejandro insists, it was but
narrated that there was an ensuing silence natural for him to drink liquor during fiesta
after Aquilio told Alejandro to go home. It was celebrations. In the absence of clear and
apparent that Aquilio resumed his interrupted positive proof that Alejandros intoxication was

3
 University of Santo Tomas - Faculty of Civil Law
Case Digest in Torts and Damages – Atty. Mauricio Ulep
Class 3D (AY 2021 – 2022)

habitual or subsequent to the plan to commit emotional suffering. Verily Hilda and her son
the crime, it is improper to consider the same Louie Gee would forever carry the emotional NOTES:
as an aggravating circumstance. Neither can wounds of the vicious killing of a husband and
intoxication be considered mitigating in the a father. With or without proof, this fact can
instant case, there being no proof that the never be denied; since it is undisputed, it must
appellant was so drunk that his will-power was be considered proved.
impaired or that he could not comprehend the
wrongfulness of his acts. We affirm the award of P50,000 as death
indemnity, and the award of P25,000 as
On the matter of damages, we agree with exemplary damages by virtue of the attendance
Alejandros contention that the trial court erred of three aggravating circumstances, pursuant
in awarding P30,000 as burial expenses for to Article 2230 of the Civil Code.
lack of receipts to prove the same. It is
necessary for a party seeking the award of
actual damages to produce competent proof or
the best evidence obtainable to justify such
award. Only substantiated and proven
expenses, or those that appear to have been
genuinely incurred in connection with the
death, wake, or burial of the victim will be
recognized in court. Nonetheless, in line with
new jurisprudence, we shall award temperate
damages in the amount of P25,000 to the
victims heirs, since they clearly incurred
funeral expenses.

We observe that no moral damages was

decreed by the trial court. Lolita testified that
no monetary consideration could equal a
daughters loss of her father. In recent
jurisprudence, we held that the award of moral
damages is mandatory in cases of murder and
homicide, without need of allegation and proof
other than the death of the victim. We
therefore award moral damages in favor of
Aquilios heirs in the amount of P50,000. We
reiterate what we said in People v. Panado:

Unlike in the crime of rape, we grant moral

damages in murder or homicide only when the
heirs of the victim have alleged and proved
mental suffering. However, as borne out by
human nature and experience, a violent death
invariably and necessarily brings about
emotional pain and anguish on the part of the
victims family. It is inherently human to suffer
sorrow, torment, pain and anger when a loved
one becomes the victim of a violent or brutal
killing. Such violent death or brutal killing not
only steals from the family of the deceased his
precious life, deprives them forever of his love,
affection and support, but often leaves them
with the gnawing feeling that an injustice has
been done to them. For this reason, moral
damages must be awarded even in the absence
of any allegation and proof of the heirs