People vs.

Subido
Date of promulgation:
September 5, 1975
Ponente:
Justice Martin
Nature of case:
APPEAL from the orders of the Court of First nstance of Mani!a
Facts:

"ria! court found Abe!ardo Subido #ui!t$ of !ibe!%
o

Sentence&

' months of
arresto ma$or
(ith the accessor$ pena!ties of the !a(

Pa$ )ne of P5**%**

ndemnif$ o+ended part$, Ma$or Arsenio Lacson, P1*,***%**

Subsidiar$ imprisonment in case of inso!,enc$

Pa$ the costs

Court of Appea!s modi)ed the -ud#ment%
o

.o
arresto ma$or

o

ndemnit$ reduced to 5,***%**
o

./ ME."/. of subsidiar$ imprisonment in case of inso!,enc$
o

0emanded case to tria! court for e1ecution of -ud#ment

September 27, 1953& Subido )!ed a motion (ith the tria! court
o

Pra$ed that&

"he court enter of record tha
t the CA4s -ud#ment
has been promu!#ated

5is appea! bond be cance!!ed
o

Ar#ument& a!thou#h he cou!d not pa$ the )ne 6 indemnit$ prescribed in the
CA4s -ud#ment
, he cou!d ./" bere7uired to ser,e the amount of )ne 6 indemnit$ in the
form of subsidiar$ imprisonment because said-ud#ment did ./" e1press!$
and speci)ca!!$ pro,ide that he shou!d ser,e the )ne 6 indemnit$ in the form
of subsidiar$ imprisonment in case of inso!,enc$

8ecember 2*, 1953& !o(er court issued a (rit of e1ecution of its -ud#ment
9:" it (as returned unsatis)ed

Februar$ 25, 1959& the Sheri+ of the Cit$ of Mani!a, armed (ith an a!ias (rit
of e1ecution, attached
;(hate,er ri#hts,
interests, or participation, if an$, defendant Abe!ardo Subi
do ma$ ha,e<
in a 2=store$ bui!din# situated at .o% 2'1'Suter, Sta% Ana, Mani!a, co,ered b$
"ransfer Certi)cate of "it!e .o% 5>17* of the 0e#ister of 8eeds of Mani!a%
o

5/?E@E0, it turned out that the propert$ !e,ied upon b$ the sheri+ (as
re#istered in the name of A#apitoSubido

:pon !earnin# of the !e,$, A#apitoA

Fi!ed a '
rd

part$ c!aim (ith the sheri+4s oBce

nstituted an action in the !o(er court to en-oin the sheri+ from proceedin#
(ith the sa!e of his propert$

Lo(er court issued a (rit of pre!iminar$ in-unction en-oinin# the sa!e of the
propert$

8ecember 1*, 1959& the o+ended part$A

o

0e#istered its opposition to Abe!ardo4s motion for cance!!ation of appea!
bond

o

AsCed !o(er court to re7uire Abe!ardo to pa$ the )ne of P5**%** 6 indemnit$
of P5,***%** (ith subsidiar$imprisonment in case of inso!,enc$

8ecember 19, 1959&
!o(er courtA

o

ssued an order den$in# Abe!ardo4s motion

o

8ec!ared that in accordance (ith the terms of the
CA4s -ud#ment
, Abe!ardo has to su+er subsidiar$imprisonment in case he cou!d not pa$ the
)ne 6 indemnit$ prescribed in the decision

8ecember 2D, 1959& Abe!ardo4s motion for reconsideration (as denied

Abe!ardo appea!ed, pressin# that the !o(er court
erredA

o

n ho!din# that under
the terms of the CA4s decision
, he is !iab!e to
EsicF
subsidiar$ imprisonment in case of inso!,enc$
o

n not ho!din# that his ci,i! !iabi!it$ has been satis)ed (ith the attachment
secured b$ the o+ended part$
Issues/questions presented:

?/. Abe!ardo can be re7uired to ser,e the )ne 6 indemnit$ prescribed in
the -ud#ment of the Court of Appea!s in the formsubsidiar$ imprisonment in
case of inso!,enc$
Ruling:
EGCEP" (ith the modi)cation that Abe!ardo ma$ no !on#er be re7uired to
su+er subsidiar$ imprisonment in case of inso!,enc$ to pa$ the indemnit$
pro,ided for in the -ud#ment be!o(, the /rders of the !o(er court den$in# his
motion forcance!!ation of appea! bond and sentencin# him to su+er
subsidiar$ imprisonment in case of inso!,enc$ to pa$ the )neimposed b$ said
-ud#ment are hereb$ aBrmed%
Reasoning:

:nder
Art. !! of t"e Revised Penal #ode$
;a !ibe! committed b$ means of (ritin#, printin#, !itho#raph$, en#ra,in#,
radio, phono#raph, paintin#s, theatrica! e1hibition, cinemato#raphic
e1hibition or an$ simi!ar means, sha!! be punished b$
prision correcciona!
in its minimum and medium period /0 a )ne ran#in# from 2** to D,***
pesos /0 both, in
addition to the ci,i! action (hich ma$ be brou#ht b$ the o+ended part$%<

o

"he court is #i,en discretion to impose the pena!t$ of imprisonment /0 )ne
/0 both for the crime of !ibe!%
o

Lo(er court& ' months of
arresto ma$or
6 )ne of P5**%** 6 indemnit$ of P1*,***%** 6 subsidiar$imprisonment in
case of inso!,enc$ 6 pa$ment of costs
o

CA& Fine of P5**%** 6 ndemnit$ of P5,***%**

Conc!udin# portion of decision&

;?5E0E:P/.,
(ith the modi)cations abo,e indicated, the appea!ed
-ud#ment is hereb$ aBrmed at appe!!ant4s costs%<

Supreme Court& "he a!!uded modi)cations cou!d mean no !ess than the
e!imination of
arrestoma$or
and reduction of indemnit$ to o+ended part$% A!! the rest of the punishment
remains,inc!udin# the subsidiar$ imprisonment in case of inso!,enc$% 5ad the
CA (anted to do a(a$(ith the subsidiar$ imprisonment in case of
inso!,enc$, it (ou!d ha,e so e1press!$ pro,ided%

And no(, it4s time for a H0AMMA0 LESS/. cIo the Supreme CourtJ First,
here4s the dispositi,e portion of the tria!court4s decision, reproduced in fu!!&
%From t"e facts above stated t"e #ourt &nds t"e accused guilt' of
libel and "e
is t"ereb' sentenced to t"ree () mont"s of arresto ma'or *it" t"e
accessor' penalties of t"e la*$ to pa' a &ne of &ve "undred
(P!++.++) pesos$ to indemnif' t"e o,ended part'$ -a'or Arsenio
.acson$ in t"e sum of ten t"ousand (P/+$+++.++) pesos$ *it"
subsidiar' imp
risonment in case of insolvenc'$ and to pa' t"e costs.0

o

"he c!ause
;(ith subsidiar$ imprisonment in case of inso!,enc$<
is SEPA0A"E8 9K A C/MMA from theprecedin# c!ause,
;he is thereb$ sentencedAin the sum of ten thousand EP1*,***%**F pesos%<

:se of comma
L ;
(ith subsidiar$ imprisonment in case of inso!,enc$<
refers to 9/"5 non=pa$ment of )ne A.8 non=pa$ment of indemnit$

f no comma L
;(ith subsidiar$ imprisonment in case of inso!,enc$<
(ou!d refer to non=pa$ment of indemnit$ on!$

.o p!ausib!e reason (h$ the !o(er court (ou!d (ant Abe!ardo to su+er
subsidiar$imprisonment in case of non=pa$ment of indemnit$ on!$%

9:" Abe!ardo is fa,ored b$ the retroacti,e force of
Art. 1 of t"e Revised Penal #ode$ as amended b' R.A. No.!23!$
(hich e1empts an accused person from subsidiar$ imprisonment in case of
inso!,enc$ to pa$ his ci,i! !iabi!it$%
o

Pena! statutes are to be strict!$ construed a#ainst the #o,ernment and
!ibera!!$ in fa,or of the accused% n theinterpretation of a pena! statute, the
tendenc$ is to #i,e it carefu! scrutin$, and to construe it (ith suchstrictness
as to safe#uard the ri#hts of the defendant%

Art. 44 of t"e Revised Penal #ode:
;Pena! !a(s sha!! ha,e a retroacti,e e+ect in so far as the$ fa,or
the person #ui!t$ of a fe!on$, (ho is not a h
abitua! crimina!Aa!thou#h at the time of the pub!ication of such !a(s a )na!
sentence has been pronounced and the con,ict is ser,in# sentence%<

o

Abe!ardo CA../" be re7uired to ser,e his ci,i! !iabi!it$ to the o+ended part$
in the form of subsidiar$imprisonment in case of inso!,enc$ because this is
no !on#er re7uired%

Abe!ardo contended that he cou!d not be made to su+er subsidiar$
imprisonment because his ci,i! !iabi!it$ had been
satis)ed (ith the attachment secured b$ the o+ended part$ on A#apito4s
propert$, (herein he (as supposed to ha,ean interest% :nti! the )na!
determinations of the ci,i! case A#apito )!ed to en-oin the Sheri+ of Mani!a
from proceedin#
(ith the sa!e of his propert$, Abe!ardo4s !iabi!it$ for subsidiar$ imprisonment
cannot at
tach as the determination of ?/. he is so!,ent is a pre-udicia! 7uestion
(hich must )rst be determined before subsidiar$ imprisonment ma$
beimposed%

o

Supreme Court& attachment does ./" operate as a satisfaction of the
-ud#ment of ci,i! !iabi!it$% Abe!ardomust su+er subsidiar$ imprisonment in
case of non=pa$ment thereof% Subsidiar$ imprisonment app!ies (henthe
o+ended is inso!,ent% "here is nothin# in the !a( that before subsidiar$
imprisonment ma$ attach, theremust be prior determination of the 7uestion
of so!,enc$ of the accused% "he moment he cannot pa$ the )ne,that means
he is inso!,ent and he must ser,e the same in form of subsidiar$
imprisonment% So A#apito has tochoose& pa$ the )ne /0 ser,e in -ai!%