Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 1

Legal Separation Defenses The crimes of adultery and concubinage shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed

t be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the


offended spouse.
People v Sensano and Ramos
G.R. No. L-37720 The offended party cannot institute criminal prosecution without including both the guilty parties, if they are
both alive, nor, in any case, if he shall have CONSENTED or pardoned the offenders.
Date of Promulgation: March 27, 1933
Ponente: Butte, J
Petition: Appeal
Petitioner: People of the Philippines
Respondent: Ursula Sensano & Marcelo Ramos

Facts:

Ursula Sensano and Mariano Ventura were married on April 29, 1919 and had a son. After the childs
birth, Mariano left his family and stayed in Cagayan for three years without writing to his wife and sending
her any support.

Being an illiterate, Ursula struggled after their abandonment, until she met Marcelo Ramos who took her and
her child to live with him.

In 1924, Mariano returned and filed a charge of adultery against his Ursula and Marcelo . Both were
sentenced with arresto mayor (four months and one day).

After the sentence, the Ursula left Marcelo and went to her husband, begging for pardon and for him to take
her back. However, Mariano refused and said that she could go wherever she wished and do as she pleased,
that he would have nothing more to do with her.

Abandoned for the second time, Ursula (with her son) went back to her Marcelo and lived with him ever
since.

Mariano left for Hawaii and stayed there for seven years . Then he returned, and filed a second charge
for adultery for the sole purpose of obtaining a divorce under Act No. 2710. The trial court granted the
second charge of adultery.

Hence this petition.

Issues/Held:

WON Mariano is barred from filing because he consented to the adultery. - YES

Ratio:

The evidence and Marianos conduct showed that he consented to the adulterous relations therefore he is
not authorized by law to institute the criminal proceeding. He practically did nothing for seven years (and
also abandoned his wife and son twice! gago lang talaga)

The court cannot accept the reasoning that it was impossible for him to take any action against the accused
because of his absence from the Philippines. He had seven years to accomplish this.

Decision:

Judgment below is REVERSED.

Opinions:

Concur: Street,
Ostrand, JJ

Notes:

Art. 344, RPC (par 1 & 2):

Prosecution of the crimes of adultery, concubinage, seduction, abduction, rape and acts of lasciviousness.