16. People v Gonzales G.R. No.

46310 October 31, 1939 that he had surprised the two offender in the act of adultery on
returning to his house at midday on the date in question.
CONCEPCION, J. Neither is it likely that a woman 40yr like Sixta Quilason, and 25yr man
like Isabelo Evangelio dared to have carnal intercourse near the toilet of
CASE: Appeal from the judgment of the CFI Tayabas the offended party house, a place which is naturally frequented by some
persons.
FACTS: The circumstance that the place was covered by weeds, does not
At midday on June 2, 1938, on returning to his house from the woods, Marciano authorize the conclusion that the offenders could lay concealed under
Gonzales surprised his wife Sixta Quilason, and Isabelo Evangelio in the act. the weeds because the latter do not usually grow to such height as to
He asked her not to repeat the same, and she promised. conceal or cover two persons committing the guilt act. It seems that
under the circumstances it is unnatural that they would execute the act
Thereafter, he left the house to see his carabaos. Upon returning to his house at in a place uncovered and open. We do not want to suppose that the
about 5pm, he found his wife with Isabelo near the toilet of his house. Isabelo sexual passion of two persons would border on madness
who was standing and buttoning his drawers, immediately took to his heels.
DECISION: parricide; MC of lack of intention to commit so grave a wrong, and of
Gonzales went after him, but unable to overtake him, he returned to where his his lack of instruction, the appealed judgment is modified: sentence: 12y1d to
wife was and, completely obfuscated, attacked her with a knife without 20y of RT and indemnify the heirs of the deceased in the amount of P1,000 with
intending to kill her. the costs.

CFI Tayabas found him guilty of parricide and sentenced him to RP with the IMPERIAL, J., dissenting
accessories of the law, to indemnify the heirs of the Sixta Quilason, in the It seems to me that the privilege or benefit extends not only to the act of
amount of P1,000, and to pay the costs. adultery, but also to any plain and positive facts which lead to no other
reasonable conclusion than that which lead to no other reasonable conclusion
WON he was entitled to the privilege afforded by A247 of the RPC. than that the adultery has been committed. If the legal provision should be
Held; No interpreted literally and narrowly, as has been done, then it would likewise not
The privilege there granted is conditioned on the requirement that the spouse be an act of adultery if a husband surprises his wife under another man, both of
surprise the husband or the wife in the act of committing sexual intercourse them being naked, while the offended husband has not seen the consummation
with another person; the accused did not surprise his wife in the very act or of the carnal act. Thus viewed, the result is a departure from the intention and
carnal intercourse, but after the act, if any such there was, because from the purpose of the legal provision. Taking into account the position of the deceased
fact that she was rising up and the man was buttoning his drawers, it does not and her paramour, what they were doing with their clothes, and the solitary
necessarily follow that a man and a woman had committed the carnal act. place covered with underbush, there could be no other conviction than that
they had just committed the carnal act, which is what warrants the imposition
Defense sought to be established by the accused is unacceptable. His testimony of a lighter penalty under A247.
is improbable.
It is not conceivable that the accused had only mildly counseled his wife The deduction made that the guilty parties could not have executed the carnal
not to repeat committing adultery with Isabelo, instead of taking act in that place finds no support in the reality of the facts or in the lessons of
harsher measures as is natural in such circumstances, if the were true experience gained through a reading of the judicial annals. Adultery is not
always committed in a ready and luxurious room, or in a comfortable bed shown, on the contrary they lived happily for fifteen years for killings
embellished with carvings. his wife
that the deceased Sixta Quilason and her paramour Isabelo Evangelio
Decision: sentence: 2y 4m 1d of destierro with costs. met at the place for one single and clear purpose, to commit adultery,
and that they committed it.
LAUREL J. dissenting
Considering the purpose which the legislator must have had in mind in The occurrence in the Alano in the Alano case is not very different from that of
extending the extraordinary or special attenuating circumstance to the the case at bar.
offended spouse, this requirement should not invariably be given a literal In the former case it did take place in plain Malate, City of Manila,
interpretation, but each case should be subjected to the rigid judicial scrutiny to In the present case in a sparely populated barrio of Sariaya, Tayabas
prevent abuse but not to frustrate the legislative rationale. To require
performance of carnal act before the offended spouse raise the chastising hands The fact that Sixta Quilason was thirty years of age and her paramour Isabelo
is to require the impossible. Evangelio was but twenty-five years, does not prove what the majority calls
"discrecion suficiente" but rather the youth of the actors and everything that
This interpretation is far from being rational and certainly does violence to the youth implies.
reason and purpose of the law. The circumstances are not for mature reflection
of for husband to engage in mathematical calculation. Precision was not In the Alano case, wife was killed in the conjugal home after she had fled,
contemplated by the legislator and could not have been. pursued by her husband
In the present case, Sixta Quilason was killed on the very spot where she was
To receive the benefit of A247 of the RPC it is not necessary that the act be in found with her paramour Isabelo Evangelio.
ipsis rebus venereis, but it is sufficient tha it be in preludiis vel paulo post,
provided that it is "el acto no pueda explicarse mas que como efecto del lazo The majority does not give credit to the testimony. I accept his testimony
criminoso del adulterio". because:
(a) it is not contradicted or disproved in its material details by the prosecution,
Taking into consideration the acts of the parties, their behavior and (b) I find nothing inherently improbable or incredible in that testimony
appearances, the surrounding circumstances, the entire res gestae, it is clear to (c) it was given under the solemnity of oath at a formal trial, and
a rational mind that they had committed the adulterios act. It is not necessary (d) it is substantially a reiteration of his sworn statement and the alleged report
that the husband should be actual and living witness to the act of copulation to concerning the suicide appears to have been made by the lieutenant of barrio of
entitle him to the benefits of A47 of the Revised Penal Code. Concepcion-Banahaw of that municipality.
it is uncontradicted that the wife and her paramour were surprised near
the toilet of the house of the couple, amids growing shrubs, late in the
afternoon while "la mujer estaba abrochando sus pantalones"
they were hardly one foot apart from each other.
this paramour was a frequent visitor of the house
the fact that a noon of the same day, June 2, 1938, both were surprised
"uno encima de la otra"
the husband had no other motive at least nothing was proved or