Basilio  Caisip,  Francisco Caisip,  Ernesto' Caisip,  Leopoldo Gonzaga, Francisco  Susana and  Jaime Lopez  were charged with the crime of robbery in  band with rape in the  Court of  First Instance of Cavite, to which charge they all pleaded not guilty. Bayani Susana  and several other persons, who were together with the defendants when the  crime was committed,  have  not   been apprehended. After  trial the Court found them except the last guilty under  the provisions of paragraph 2, article  294, of the Revised Penal Code, with  the concurrence of the aggravating circumstances  of band and dwelling, and sentenced

* * * each of them to reclusion perpetua, with the accessories of the law, and to indemnify jointly and severally  Corazon  Mendoza in the sum of P1 ,000.00, and Lepiña Lapidario in the sum of P517.00 without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to pay proportionately the costs of this action.  (Crim. case  No. 11473.)

After the prosecution had rested  its  case, the information as to Jaime Lopez was dismissed for lack of sufficient evidence  to support his conviction.

Only Basilio Caisip, Francisco Caisip  and Leopoldo Gonzaga have appealed.

The spouses Zoilo Mendoza and Lepiña Lapidario and their seven children lived  in barrio Manalo, Dasmarinas, Cavite.  In the evening of 22 November 1952 (Saturday), while Zoilo was away in Bataan,  his  wife and children who had  retired at about 8:00 o'clock that evening, were awakened by the barking of  dogs between 9:00  o'clock and 10:00 o'clock.   Lepiña rose to find out why the dogs were barking and heard the sound of people going up the house.  Corazon Mendoza,  15 years  of age and  the eldest of the couple's children,  heard footsteps of people going up the house.  The people coming up told the inmates of the house to open the  door, for otherwise they would  be killed.  Because they refused to open the door they opened it themselves and  entered the house.  They crossed the sala and opened the door  of the room,  which was lighted with a kerosene lamp, where Lepina and her seven children who were seized with  fear were huddled closely to each other.  One of the men wearing a mask of handkerchief was shoved by  his companions into the room, aimed  his gun  at Lepina and ordered them  to separate from each other.  The masked man took hold  of  Antonio  Mendoza, the eldest  son, pulled him  out of the room, brought him to the balcony and left him there guarded by one  of the men who carried a gun  and held him by  the neck and told  him  to lie down  for  otherwise he would be killed. Antonio recognized him to be Basilio Caisip.   The same masked man who pulled Antonio to the balcony returned to the room where Lepina and her children were and tried to pull Corazon who clung tightly to her mother's hands. Sensing that the masked  man had an evil design,  her mother pleaded that her daughter be spared as she was "not yet a grown-up lady" and to pity them because  her daughter was sick.  The masked man persisted in his evil design. Corazon and  her  mother  resisted and grappled with him.  While grappling his mask fell  down and they recognized him to be Ernesto  Caisip.   When Ernesto succeeded in extricating Corazon from her mother's hold, he dragged her to the sala or to a part of the kitchen similar to a balcony, where Ernesto  laid  her down on the floor. Four of them held her by  the arms,  feet and neck, while two of them  pulled down her  drawers.  Ernesto laid himself on top of her and succeeded in having carnal knowledge of her.  While  Ernesto was  ravishing  her, one of  the men who was by her side covered her  face with a hat and lighted a match.  She wiggled her  head and  moved her body to disengage  herself  from their hold and the hat that they had put to  cover her face fell off.  She  saw Leopoldo  Gonzaga  and  Francisco  Susana by  her side. After  Ernesto had satisfied  his beastly urge,  Francisco Susana took  his turn,  placed himself  on  top  of her while the rest held her arms and feet, and  succeeded in having carnal knowledge of her.  After Francisco, four of them followed him in succession  without interval.  She did not recognize the  last four because  it  was dark  and she was weakened.  As she did  not have  sexual experience  and had not  yet  menstruated, she felt the pain  and kept on struggling and screaming for help.  The malefactors tried to muffle her voice by  covering her mouth. Lepina heard her daughter's screams and was overcome with  pity for her.   She tried  to rise and put down her sick child to come to her aid, but Leopoldo  Gonzaga who was watching her kicked her and ordered  her  to  lie down and keep quiet.  Antonio who also heard his sister's voice crying for help could  not come to her aid because Basilio Caisip who was guarding him told him to stay lying down  and keep still.   After the malefactors  had criminally abused Corazon, they left her and went to the room where Lepiiia and the rest of her children were and ordered her to bring out her  money and jewelry.  When she answered that she had none, Francisco  Caisip  aimed  his  gun  at  her and threatened to shoot her if  she would refuse to yield them.  Then Francisco Caisip, Basilio Caisip, Ernesto Caisip, Leopoldo Gonzaga and Francisco Susana ransacked the room.  When their efforts yielded nothing,  Francisco Caisip took hold of Lepiña.  As she tried to disengage herself from  him, the purse containing her money and jewelry tied to her right shoulder under  her dress she was wearing dropped  on the floor.  When she tried to pick it up  her sick child  whom she was  carrying fell from her  lap. Francisco Caisip picked up  the purse containing money amounting to P350,  a pair of earrings and a  ring which she bought for P6,000  in Japanese military  war notes and a chain (cuintas)  costing  P38, Philippine currency. Afterwards the malefactors left bringing along with them five cavanes of palay belonging to the family. Lepiña went to  the place where Corazon was left by the male- factors and found her lying on her side smeared with blood flowing from her genitals,  too weak to stand  up.   She brought her daughter to the  room and changed her bloody dress.  As she  was dressing  her up her son Antonio came in.  The next day, Sunday, 23 November 1952, they packed up their belongings  and transferred to Bacoor.  The  following Monday, 24  November  she  reported the  incident to the  PC headquarters at Imus.  On 26 November 1952, Dr. Asisclo  I. Osteria, president of the 9th sanitary division, Imus,  Cavite, performed an internal examination on the body of Corazon and found  the following:

1. Whitish  vaginal discharge.
   
2. Both  labia majora, and minora  were congested.
   
3. Vagina, hardly admit ring finger.
   
4. There is marked congestion of the vaginal wall.
   
5. There are  distinct fresh lacerations of the hymen at 6, 3 and 9 o'clock. 
   
6. The  microspical examination of the whitish vaginal discharge in this case must be done for confirmation  to look for spermatozoa, or of genococal infection if  any, but because of limited facilities, it was not done here.  (Exhibit A.)
   

The three appellants denied having committed the crime imputed to them and they  set up an  alibi.  Basilio Caisip claimed that in the evening of 22 November  1952 he was at his house  taking care of  his wife  who  was to  give birth to  a child and never  left the house.   Francisco Caisip insisted that in the evening of  that day he went to fetch Francisca de Quiros  to assist at the delivery of the wife  of  his brother  Basilio and never left the latter's house  after fetching  her except to  run errands for his sister-in-law.   Leopoldo Gonzaga claimed  that from  4:00 o'clock in the afternoon of 22  November 1952 he  was in Pasay City at the residence of his  cousin Arcadio Geronimo who died on that day, keeping  vigil over him, until the afternoon of 24 November 1952 when he was buried, and  never left Pasay City until after the interment.

According to the  two  Caisip  brothers, the reason they were  implicated by the Mendozas in this case was because Zoilo Mendoza, husband of Lepiña, had suspected Francisco Caisip of stealing his  plow blade and as the two brothers look almost the same, Zoilo must have mistaken Basilio for Francisco.  Leopoldo Gonzaga could not think of any reason he was implicated by the complainants in this case. He declared that he had no  quarrel with the Mendozas.

Antonio Mendoza, a  boy of thirteen years, identified Basilio Caisip who held him by the  neck, ordered him to lie down at the  point of a gun and  guarded him at the balcony while his sister was being ravished by the malefactors.  Lepiña Lapidario testified  that  Basilio Caisip was  one of those who ransacked the room of her house looking for money and jewelry.

Lepiña Lapidario declared that Francisco Caisip aimed a gun at her asking her to yield her money and jewelry; that he was one  of those who ransacked the room of her house looking for money and jewelry; that he took hold of her violently when she refused to produce them; and that he picked up her purse containing the money and jewelry when it  fell on the floor  from her dress.

Corazon Mendoza identified Leopoldo Gonzaga as one of those who were  by her side holding her arms  and feet while Ernesto Caisip and Francisco Shisana were ravishing her.

The appellants' weak defense of alibi  is not  sufficient to overcome  the  positive identification made of them as the perpetrators  of  the crime by the witnesses, against whom they could not impute sufficient reason for pointing to them.  On the other hand, it is their own witnesses Who had reason  to testify  falsely in their favor.  Francisco Caisip's wife is the god-daughter of  Santiago  Sangria's mother; while Sixta Gonzaga, being the  sister of Leopoldo Gonzaga's father, is his aunt.  Francisca  de Quiros, after testifying that in the evening of  22 November 1952 she was fetched by  Francisco Caisip  to assist in the delivery of his sister-in-law, said on cross-examination that she did not  remember the date when she was fetched  for that  purpose.

Counsel de oficio for the Caisip brothers insinuates that as it  was dark  in the balcony  Antonio could not have identified Basilio. Antonio testified that Basilio had  no mask oh; that it  was not dark in the balcony; that being from the same barrio he knew Basilio very  well; and that they used to talk  to each other before the incident.  Counsel's assertion that Lepina Lapidario did not mention the names of Francisco and Basilio Caisip to the PC authorities in Imus when she reported the incident is belied  by the sworn statement of Lepina  herself (Exhibit 1-Gonzaga).

Counsel de oficio for Leopoldo Gonzaga claims that the crime was not committed by a band because only two of the malefactors were armed.  Corazon Mendoza testified that the men more or  less seven in number bore firearms; that Ernesto Caisip and Francisco Susana carried  short and  long arms, respectively; and that she saw Francisco Susana's firearm as he began to abuse her.  Further, the same counsel  contends that paragraph 2, .article 294, of the Revised Penal Code, which provides:

The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium period of reclusion  perpetua,  when the robbery shall have been accompanied by rape or  intentional mutilation,  or if by  reason or on  occasion of such robbery, any of the physical injuries penalized in subsection 1 of Article 263 shall have  been inflicted,

"refers to those cases where rape was planned  as  part and parcel of the robbery or committed after the robbery or after, an attempt at robbery has been made.  When rape was the principal crime with robbery being a mere after thought, the crime committed are two separate and distinct crimes, and liability in the  absence  of conspiracy is determined  and measured by each individual  conduct;"  and that granting that Leopoldo Gonzaga  had been sufficiently identified  as one  of those  who committed the rape, conspiracy not having been proven and  he not having  been sufficiently "identified  as one of those who took the money, jewelries  and  sacks of  palay, there arises a doubt  as to whether he was still in  the locality of the dwelling of the victims during the time the robbery was being committed." Counsel concludes that he  should  be acquitted.  Taking into consideration that the crime  of robbery with  rape was committed in band and the manner  the crime  was perpetrated,  the logical inference is  that the defendants  had conspired to commit  the crime  of robbery in band with rape.  Leopoldo Gonzaga is, therefore, as guilty as his co-conspirators.  Moreover, paragraph 2,  article 294; of the Revised Penal Code does not differentiate whether the rape was committed before, during or  after the robbery.

 It is enough  that robbery shall have been accompanied by rape to be punishable under the aforementioned provision.

The judgment under review is affirmed, with the proportionate costs against the appellants

Paras,  C. J., Bengzon, Montemayor, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Endencia, and  Barrera, JJ., concur.