[ G. R. No. L-3591, September 29, 1951 ]
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. EMILIO GAZMIN, ET AL., DEFENDANTS. GREGOKIO TUMABAT, RUPERTO TUMABAT AND AVELINO MALANO, DEFENDANTS AND APPELLANTS.
D E C I S I O N
PADILLA, J.:
Upon this evidence the trial court found Gregorio Tuitnabat, Ruperto Tumabat and Avelino Malano guilty of the crime of robbery in band with rape, as charged in the information, and sentenced eaeh to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, the accessories of the law, to indemnify, jointly and severally, Eugenio Buhangin in the sum of two hundred forty pesos (P240) and Adela Guzman in the sum of thirty pesos (P30), to further indemnify Rosa Gagutan and Adela Guzman in the sum of five hundred pesos (P500) each, and to pay the proportionate costs. Upon a plea of guilty Emilio Gazmin'was sentenced accordingly. From this judgment the three defendants have appealed.
Appellants' defense is alibi. Gregorio Tumabat's is to the effect that on 2 December 1948, Felix Salvador and Ariston Acob went to his house to buy corn and as they could not return home because it was already late in the evening, they took their supper and slept in his house on the night of that day. Gregorio never went out during that night. Ruperto Tumabat's is to the effect that at dusk he, together with Marcelo Gandesa, went to Calagui River in the barrio of Carabatan Chica and there fished the whole night from 2 to 3 December 1948. Avelino Malano's is to the effect that on 2 December 1948 he was called by Pilar Baccay to warm water with which to give sponge bath to her granddaughter who was suffering from fever and convulsions. This defense cannot prevail over the positive testimony of Eugenio Buhangin, Rosa Gagutan and Adela Guzman, who saw and recognized the four malefactors known to them because they were barrio mates and there was a lighted petroleum lamp in the house. Gregorio Tumabat, Ruperto Tumabat and Avelino Malano testified that the witnesses for the prosecution, who pointed to them as the perpetrators of the crime of robbery in band with rape, had no motive to impute to them such a serious crime. The appellants having denied that Emilio Gazmin was with them on the night of the commission of the crime, the prosecution put. him on the witness stand and testified on rebuttal that on the night of 2 December 1948 the appellants and he were together and all of them went to the house of Eugenio Buhangin.
We are convinced that the indivisible complex crime charged in the information was really committed by the appellants.[1] The penalty imposed by the trial court in its maximum period because the crime was committed by a band, being in accordance with law, is affirmed, with costs against the appellants.
Paras, C. J., Feria, Pablo, Bengzon, Tuason, Reyes, Jugo and Bautista Angelo, JJ., concur.
[1] U. S. vs. Tiongco, 37 Phil., articles 294, par. 2, and 246, as amended by Republic Act No. 12, of the Revised Penal Code.