Republic of the Philippines

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION

Metropolitan Trial Court
BRANCH 84
NORTH, CALOOCAN CITY
38 Congressional Road, North Caloocan City
[email protected]/0975-7301414

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

- versus - CRIM. CASE NO. 267195

For: ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
Art. 336 of the Revised Penal Code

VICTORIANO BATU y CUIZON,

Accused.
x----------------------------------X

JUDGMENT
The accusatory portion of the Information dated April 22, 2019 filed
by the Office of the City Prosecutor of Caloocan City charging accused
VICTORIANO BATU y CUIZON for the crime of ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
under Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code, reads as follows:

“That on or about the 17 th day of April 2019,

in Caloocan City, Metro Manila and within the juris-
diction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused, by means of force, and intimidation, with
lewd design, did then and there willfully, unlawfully
and feloniously, commit acts of lasciviousness upon
the person of one FE ALEXANDRIA MALONDA y
PUNZALAN, by then and there embracing her
tightly, kissing her face and neck, touching and
squeezing her breast, inserting his tongue to her
mouth and kiss her neck all over again, against her
will and without her consent.

CONTRARY TO LAW.”

Upon arraignment on July 30, 2019 accused VICTORIANO BATU y

CUIZON pleaded “Not Guilty” to the crime charged. Preliminary conference
was conducted and terminated.   Thereafter, trial on the merits ensued.

1
 Evidence for the Prosecution
The prosecution presented PCpl KATRINA PARAN, the investigator-on
case, FE ALEXANDRIA MALONDA y PUNZALAN, the complaining witness
herself.

On October 17, 20191 both the prosecution and the defense stipu-
lated upon the testimony of PCpl Katrina Paran the investigation officer
who received the person of accused Victoriano Batu y Cuizon for investiga-
tion purposes, to wit:

“1. She was assigned at the Philippine National Po-

lice Barugo, Caloocan City Police Station;

2. She was on duty on April 17 to 18, 2019 from

8:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m.;

3. She was the investigator on case and took the

Sworn Statement of complainant Fe Alexan-
dria Malonda and Barangay Tanod Enrico Pun-
zalan;

4. The said witness, has no participation and

was not present at the time of the commis-
sion of the crime.”

Private complainant PCpl Katrina Paran2 whose Judicial Affidavit

formed part of her direct testimony testified that on April 17, 2019 at
around 4:00 to 5:00 in the afternoon, private complainant went to the Of-
fice of the Senior Citizen (OSCA) located at Barangay 169, Caloocan City.
Private complainant testified that she went to OSCA to follow up the Senior
Citizen's Identification Card replacement of her grandmother. Accused
Bato was the Barangay Administrator of Barangay 169, BF Homes, Deparo,
Caloocan City and also the President of OSCA. Private complainant testi-
fied that during the small talk between her and the accused, the latter of-
fered to give her a load worth One Hundred Pesos (P100.00). Private com-
plainant refused to accept the money but accused insisted to give the said
amount and later on accused gave an additional amount of Five Hundred
Pesos (P500.00) for the reason that accused considered her as his own
granddaughter. When private complainant was about to leave the office,
accused suddenly embraced private complainant and forcedly kissed her
lips by inserting his tongue while squeezing both breast of private com-
plainant and against the latter’s will. Private complainant with all her
might, pushed away the accused and had the chance to escape and imme-
diately ran away. Private complainant instead of going directly to her

1
TSN, October 17, 2019, Records, pages 120-121
2
TSN, November 12, 2019, Records, pages 124

2
 house, opted to go to the house of her grandmother. A moment later, pri-
vate complainant received a text message from the accused, asking her if
she already received the load and conveyed his apology for the wrongful
acts that accused had done and promised that the incident will never hap-
pen again. Private complainant testified that the said text message was
photographed using her other phone Vivo F11. When private complainant
went home at around 9:00 in the evening, she relayed the incident to his
father, Atty. Michael Malonda. The incident was immediately reported to
Barugo Police Station who immediately responded and led to the arrest of
the accused. Private complainant claimed that she was traumatized be-
cause of the incident but no Medical Certificate was presented to prove the
trauma that complaining witness had suffer.

The Court admitted the prosecution Formal Offer of Evidence consist-

ing of the following documentary exhibits:

DESCRIPTION
EXHIBIT
April 18, 2019, Referral Slip of the
“A” and its sub- PNP Women and Children
markings3 Protection Desk of Caloocan City
Police Station to the Honorable City
Prosecutor of Caloocan City,
proving that the instant criminal
complaint for Acts of
Lasciviousness filed by Fe
Alexandria Malonda against the
herein accused was referred by the
PNP Women and Children
Protection Desk to the Office of the
City Prosecutor of Caloocan City for
Inquest Proceeding and the
disposition of the Inquest
Prosecutor in the Acts of
Lasciviousness was filed as charged
against the accused.
Sinumpaang Salaysay of Fe
“B” and its sub- Alexandria P. Malonda, proving the
markings4 existence, due execution and as
part of the direct testimony of the
private complaint to establish that
the herein accused committed the
crime of Acts of Lasciviousness
beyond reasonable doubt.
3
Exhibit “A” and its sub-markings, records, page 8
4
Exhibit “B” and its sub-markings, records, page 9

3
 Arrest and Booking Sheet,
5
“D” Photographs/Mug Shot, proving its
existence and as part of the record
“F”6 of this case.
Vivo F11 (Clone), proving the
“H” existence of the complainant's
cellular phone and sim card phone
no. 09359605649 to corroborate
complainant's statement that she
was texted by the accused using
Cellular Phone No. +639454919088
immediately after the incident.
Photographs of Inbox Messages
“I” Display Screen of Vivo F11 (Clone),
proving that the private
“J” complainant was able to
photograph the Inbox Display
(clone) before it malfunctions,
showing the accused's Cellular
Phone No. +639454919088 which
establish the fact that the accused
texted the private complainant and
ask for forgiveness regarding his
lascivious Misconduct committed to
the private complainant.

Evidence for the Defense

The defense presented accused VICTORIANO C. BATU, disproving
the material allegations in the Information, DR. ARNEL LIM, consultant
physician of the accused since 2016 up to present and B/T EX-O ROBERTO
C. DE GUZMAN, refuting the Affidavit of Arrest made by B/T Enrico Punza-
lan.

Accused Victoriano C. Batu7 whose Judicial Affidavit formed part of

his direct testimony testified that on April 17, 2019 at around 3:00 in the
afternoon, he was the on-duty officer of Office of the Senior Citizen (OSCA)
located at Ninang Nena St. BF Homes. Phase 2, Caloocan City. Accused
testified that private complainant came to OSCA and asked for assistance
regarding the replacement of Senior Identification Card of private com-
plainant’s grandmother that was lost. Accused testified that he personally
knew private complainant because the latter was the niece of Barangay
5
Records, page 23
6
Records, page 24
7
TSN, September 30, 2020, Records, page 320

4
 Treasurer Karen Atos and Barangay Tanod Enrico Punzalan. Private com-
plainant was also a former On the Job Trainee of North Caloocan City Hall.
Because accused was somehow acquainted to private complainant, they
engaged in a small talk for about a minute. Accused advised private com-
plainant to call her grandmother and relay the problem regarding the re-
placement of the lost Senior Citizen Identification Card but private com-
plainant replied that she do not have load to call her grandmother. Ac-
cused offered load to private complainant which made the latter happy.
Private complainant also mentioned about snacks of her friends so accused
gave Five Hundred Pesos (P500.00) to private complainant. Accused
claimed that the act of giving money was natural to him because he also
extends financial help to members, employees of OSCA of Barangay 169,
Caloocan City. After giving the amount of Five Hundred Pesos (P500.00) to
private complainant, accused informed private complainant that he had still
things to be done so private complainant decided to go home but seemed
to be upset. Because accused noticed that private complainant was upset
for dismissing the latter in no time, accused texted private complainant,
the following: “sorry di na mauulit magkaibigan naman tayo.” Accused fur-
ther testified that on or about 11:30 in the evening of the same day, ac-
cused was surprised when police officers came to his house together with
the parents of private complainant because a complaint was filed against
accused. Accused narrated that he was brought to barangay hall of
Barangay 169 and later on brought to Barugo Police Station of Caloocan
City. Accused vehemently denied the accusations against him and con-
tends the impossibility of the alleged unlawful acts against private com-
plainant because the office of OSLA was known to be a public place and
senior citizens and other persons were always going in and out of the OSLA
office every day.

Witness Dr. Arnel Lim8 testified that accused Victoriano Batu was his
patient since year 2016 at Pacific Global Hospital. Witness Dr. Lim testi-
fied that accused was diagnosed of diabetes and hypertension. Witness
prescribed medicines as maintenance for the accused such as Insulin,
Glargine or Lantus, Metformin to maintain accused’s diabetes and Lozartan
for accused hypertension. Witness testified that he advised healthy life-
style to accused and to avoid sugar or sweet foods and to exercise daily
because accused was diabetic and suffering from hypertension. Witness
confirmed that accused had his check-up sometime in November 2020 in
his clinic. Witness further testified that in his opinion, if the diabetes of the
accused was controlled, he can live an ordinary life and had no restriction
and can do anything unless bedridden. Witness confirmed that the dia-
betes of accused was controlled and as of the last check-up of the accused
sometime in November 2020, accused was an out-patient, can do shopping
or anything because accused is not a bedridden.

8
TSN, January 26, 2021, Records, page 375.

5
 Witness Barangay Tanod Ex-O Roberto C. De Guzman9 testified that
on April 17, 2019 he was one of the Barangay Tanod on duty together with
B/T Joanne Redubla, B/T Ma. Luisa Ocampo and B/T Dalmacio Zamora.
Witness B/T Ex-O De Guzman testified that B/T Enrico Punzalan who sub-
mitted the Affidavit of Arrest of accused Batu to Bagumbong Police Station
was not authorized and was not on duty during the time of incident on
April 17, 2019. The Barangay Logbook was presented proving that B/T
Punzalan was not one of the assigned on-duty barangay official on April 17,
2019. Witness further testified that B/T Punzalan was not the one who ar-
rested the accused because B/T Punzalan was not present during the filing
of the record blotter on April 17, 2019. When a memo was about to be is-
sued against B/T Punzalan, the latter took absences and later on submitted
his resignation.

The Court admitted the defense Formal Offer of Evidence consisting

of the following documentary exhibit:

DESCRIPTION
EXHIBIT
Kontra-Salaysay of accused
“1” and its sub- Victoriano Batu dated September
markings up to “1- 11, 2019, proving that the accused
B”10 is innocent of the crime charged,
and so, to disprove the allegation of
acts of lasciviousness on April 17,
2019, by the private complainant in
her complaint-affidavit as total
baseless and unfounded.
Signature of the Accused found in
“1-C”11 page 3 of his Kontra-Salaysay,
proving the due execution of the
accused' Kontra-Salaysay as
subscribed and sworn to before
Notary Public, Atty. Lorenzo S.
Danipog on September 11, 2019,
and further confirmed the
truthfulness and veracity of his
statements thereon.
Certification of the Barangay Ex-O
“2”12 of Barangay 169, Deparo, Caloocan
City, proving the fact that the Office
of Punong Barangay 169, thru

9
TSN, Maay 26, 2021, Records, pages 431
10
Exhibit “1” and its sub-markings, records, pages 304-305
11
Exhibit “1-C” and its sub-markings, records, page 306
12
Exhibit “2”, records, page 413

6
 Barangay Ex-O Roberto C. De
Guzman duly certified that arresting
officer, Barangay Tanod Enrico
Punzalan, was NOT ON OFFICIAL
DUTY and/or did not report for
work on April 17, 2019, which was
contrary to the latter’s claim in his
sworn Affidavit of Arrest.
Barangay Logbook, proving and
“3”13 corroborating the fact that the
name of Barangay Tanod Enrico
Punzalan was not found and/or
officially logged-in the Barangay
Logbook on April 17, 2019.
Barangay Blotter, proving the fact
“4”14 that in the Barangay Blotter dated
April 17, 2019, it was reported that
four (4) police personnel led by P02
Allaga then accompanied by Atty.
Michael Malonda and Eleonor
Malonda, who went to the house of
the accused and arrested him, but
without Barangay Tanod Enrico
Punzalan.
Radiology Report,
“5”and its sub- Electrocardiographic Report and
marking up to “5- Discharge Instruction issued to the
D”15 patient (Victoriano Batu) by
Commonwealth Hospital and
Medical Center (CHMC), proving the
fact that the accused-patient has
been suffering from chronic
diabetes complicated with heart
problem and was being treated
and/or underwent
medical laboratory examinations
and confirmed by the attending
physician-specialist Dr. Lim.
Photographs of Accused Victoriano
“5-E” to “5-F”16 Batu taken on Sept. 17, 2020,
proving the fact of the deteriorating
health condition of the almost 80-
year-old accused, due to chronic
13
Exhibit “3”, records, page 414
14
Exhibit “4”, records, page 415
15
Exhibit “5” and its sub-markings, records, page 229-289
16
Exhibit “5-E” and “5-F”, records, page 290

7
 diabetes complicated with heart
disease and under that condition,
to prove the physical impossibility
of committing the said criminal act
as alleged by the private
complainant.
Panghukumang Salaysay of
“6” with sub-mark- Victoriano Batu dated September
ing up to “6-J”17 19, 2020 proving that the accused
is innocent of the offense charged
as the prosecution failed to prove
the elements thereof, and as a
matter of
defense, presented thereafter his
countervailing evidence to refute
the allegations of the private
complainant.
Signature of accused Victoriano
“6-K” Batu as affiant, found in Page 9 of
Panghukumang Salaysay, proving
the due Victoriano C. Batu, as
execution of the accused'
Panghukumang Salaysay and
confirmed the truthfulness and
veracity of all his statements
thereon, as attested to by defense
counsel, Atty. Misael Raymundo C.
Dinsay.
Panghukumang Salaysay of Roberto
“7” with sub-mark- C. De Guzman dated March 3, 2021
ing up to “7-E” (consisting of six [6] pages), to
corroborate the fact that arresting
officer Barangay Tanod Enrico
Punzalan, was not on official duty
or did not report for work on April
17, 2019 at Barangay 169 Office -
where the alleged incident
happened and further confirmed
the authenticity and due execution
of certain official documents
(i.e.Barangay Ex-O certification,
Barangay Logbook, Barangay
Blotter) issued therefor.
Sinumpaang Salaysay ng Nag-
“8”18
17
Exhibit “6” to “6-J”, records, page 292-303
18
Exhibit “8”, records, pages 407 to 412

8
 Aresto of Barangay Enrico N.
Punzalan, dated April 18, 2019, as
sworn in before ACP Shiela Cindy
DC. Masangque-Demorar, proving
the fact that Enrico Punzalan, then
a Barangay Tanod of Barangay 169,
executed and Afiidavit of Arrest and
swore that he arrested the accused
at the Office of Barangay 169
Deparo Caloocan City, despite the
fact that he actually arrested the
accused at his residence in the
evening of April 17, 2019 and even
if he was not on official duty and/or
did not report for work on the said
date.
Signature of affiant BT Enrico N.
“8-A” Punzalan, proving that then
Barangay Tanod EnricoN. Punzalan
executed a Sinumpaang Salaysay
ng Nag-Aresto and subscribed and
swore it before ACP Shiela Cindy
DC. Masangque-Demorar.

ISSUE

Whether or not accused VICTORIANO BATU y CUIZON is liable for

the crime of ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS under Article 336 of the Revised
Penal Code.

RULING OF THIS COURT

Acts of Lasciviousness is defined and penalized under Article 336 of

the Revised Penal Code. It read as follows:

“Any person who shall commit any act of

lasciviousness upon other persons of either sex,
shall be punished by prision correccional.”

For an accused to be convicted of acts of lasciviousness under the

foregoing provision, the prosecution has the burden to prove the
confluence of the following essential elements:

(1) that the offender commits any act of lasciviousness or

lewdness; and

9
 (2) that it is done under any of the following circumstances:

(a) through force, threat or

intimidation;
(b) when the offended party is
deprived of reason or otherwise
unconscious;
(c) by means of fraudulent
machinations or grave abuse of
authority;
(d) when the offended party is under
twelve (12) years of age or is
demented, even though none of
the circumstance mentioned
above be present; and
(e) that the offended party is another
person of either sex.”19

In Amployo v. People,20 the Court expounded on the definition of the

word "lewd," to wit:

The term "lewd" is commonly defined as something indecent or ob-

scene; it is characterized by or intended to excite crude sexual desire.
That an accused is entertaining a lewd or unchaste design is necessarily a
mental process the existence of which can be inferred by overt acts carry-
ing out such intention, i.e.,  by conduct that can only be interpreted as lewd
or lascivious. The presence or absence of lewd designs is inferred from the
nature of the acts themselves and the environmental circumstances. What
is or what is not lewd conduct, by its very nature, cannot be pigeonholed
into a precise definition.

What constitutes lewd or lascivious conduct must be determined from

the circumstances of each case. It may be quite easy to determine in a
particular case that certain acts are lewd and lascivious, and it may be ex-
tremely difficult in another case to say just where the line of demarcation
lies between such conduct and the amorous advances of an ardent lover. 21

Private complainant Fe Alexandria Malondo, alleges that when she

was about to leave the Office of Senior Citizen Association (OSCA) when
accused suddenly embraced her tightly, kiss her face and neck, touched
and squeezed her breast, inserting accused tongue to her mouth and kiss
her neck all over again.

A judicious examination of the records, the Court finds that the

prosecution failed to prove the material elements acts of lasciviousness as
19
People vs Ladra, G.R. No. 221443, 17 July 2017
20
Quimvelv. People,  G.R. No. 214497, April 18, 2017.
21
U.S. v. Gomez,  30 Phil. 22, 25 (1915); other citations omitted.

10
 assailed in the complaint. The evidence presented by the prosecution are
insufficient to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

First, the Court was not swayed that the lewdness was done through
force, threat or intimidation. Nowhere in the testimony of the private
complainant assailed that accused applied force, threat or intimidation at
the course of the alleged lascivious conduct of the accused. The incident
happened in a broad day light and happened inside the office of the Senior
Citizen (OSLA) which is a public place and a number or persons are going
to and from the office in its everyday dealings. The Court is not convinced
on the reason given by the private complainant who did not shout nor
resisted the moment accused embraced her, more so, when accused
kissed her lips and squeezed her breast. Given the place of incident, there
is a high probability that another person be present at Barangay 169, Office
of the Senior Citizen. Second, there is no evidence that private
complainant was deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious. In fact,
after the incident private complainant chose to go to the house of her
grandmother instead of directly reporting the incident to the barangay hall
which is within the vicinity of the Office of the Senior Citizen, where the
alleged incident happened. Third, no evidence presented by the
prosecution that there is a presence of fraudulent machination or grave
abuse of authority and lastly, private complainant was not under twelve
years old (12 y/o) or demented when the incident happened.

All told, the court hereby resolved that the prosecution failed to
established all the material elements of the crime against the accused.

Every criminal conviction requires the prosecution to prove two

things: (1) the fact of the crime, i.e.,  the presence of all the elements of
the crime for which the accused stands charged, and (2) the fact that the
accused is the perpetrator of the crime.22   When a crime is committed, it
is the duty of the prosecution to prove the identity of the perpetrator of the
crime beyond reasonable doubt for there can be no conviction even if the
commission of the crime is established. 23  Apart from showing the
existence and commission of a crime, the State has the burden to correctly
identify the author of such crime. Both facts must be proved by the State
beyond cavil of a doubt on the strength of its evidence and without solace
from the weakness of the defense.24

Our legal culture demands the presentation of proof beyond

reasonable doubt before any person may be convicted of any crime and
deprived of his life, liberty or even property. As every crime must be
established beyond reasonable doubt, it is also paramount to prove, with
the same quantum of evidence, the identity of the culprit. It is basic and
elementary that there can be no conviction until and unless an accused has
22
People v. Ayola,  416 Phil. 861, 871 (2001).
23
People v. Sinco,  408 Phil. 1, 12 (2001).
24
People v. Limpangog,  444 Phil 691, 709 (2003).

11
 been positively identified. The hypothesis of his guilt must flow naturally
from the facts proved and must be consistent with all of them.

WHEREFORE, in the light of the foregoing premises, for failure of

the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt,
VICTORIANO BATU y CUIZON is hereby ACQUITTED for the crime of ACTS
OF LASCIVIOUSNESS under Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code.

SO ORDERED.

15 December 2022, North Caloocan City.

BENELITA J. MONES-BORROMEO
Presiding Judge

Copy furnished:

1. Accused- Victoriano Batu- No.13 Florentino St., BF Homes, Phas , Brgy. 169, Barolo
2. Complainant- Fe Alexandria Malonda- Block 5, Lot 13, Kingstown 2, Brgy. 171, Bagumbong Caloocan City
3. Defense counsel- Atty. Misyel Dinsay- Block 10, Lot 15, LD-NHA Village, Kaagapay Road, Brgy. 186, Caloocan City
4. ACP Dencio G. Somera, [email protected]

12