THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs. ANTONIO Z. OANIS and ALBERTO GALANTA, defendants-appellants.
G.R. No. L-47722 July 27, 1943
Morgan, J.:
FACTS:
Antonio Z. Oanis , Chief of Police of Cabanatuan, and Alberto Galanta, corporal of the Philippine Constabulary, charged with the murder of one Serapio Tecson, were found guilty by the lower court of homicide through reckless imprudence. Defendants appealed separately from this judgment. They invoked the justifying circumstance of Article 11, Par. 5 of the Revised Penal Code.
In the afternoon of December 24, 1938, upon receiving from Major Guido a telegram with the following tenor: "Information received escaped convict Anselmo Balagtas with bailarina and Irene in Cabanatuan get him dead or alive." Captain Godofredo Monsod, Constabulary Provincial Inspector at Cabanatuan, Nueva Ecija showed them a copy of the above-quoted telegram and a newspaper clipping containing a picture of Balagtas and instructed them to arrest Balagtas and, if overpowered, to follow the instruction contained in the telegram. The same instruction was given to the chief of police Oanis who was likewise called by the Provincial Inspector. Upon receiving information of the fugitive’s whereabouts, they went to the house of Irene where Balagtas was said to be staying. Defendants Oanis and Galanta then went to the room of Irene, wherein they saw a man sleeping with his back towards the door, where they were, simultaneously or successively fired at him . They found out later that the person shot and killed was not Anselmo Balagtas but Serapio Tecson. These are the facts as found by the trial court and fully supported by the evidence, particularly by the testimony of Irene Requinea.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the justifying circumstance of Art. 11, Par. 5 of the Revised Penal Code is applicable to the accused.
HELD:
No. It is an incomplete justifying circumstance as defined in Art. 11, Par. 5 of the Revised Penal Code. Although Oanis and Galanta were both performing acts in the fulfilment of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or office, they were not able to comply with the second requisite in order that the circumstance may be taken as a justifying one, which is: that the injury or offense committed be the necessary consequence of the due performance of such duty or the lawful exercise of such right or office.
For the killing of Tecson while sleeping and with his back towards the door, the Supreme Court charged them with murder instead of homicide.