EUSEBIO BABANTO, petitioner, vs. HONORABLE MARIANO A.

ZOSA, Presiding Judge,

Branch III, Court of First Instance of Misamis Occidental, et al., respondents.

G.R. No. L-32895 February 28, 1983

FACTS:

Eusebio Babanto, a policeman, ordered the girl Leonida Dagohoy, 13 years old and with low
mentality, ordered to come along to the municipal building but they turned to the ABC Hall
((annex to the municipal building ) where the accused consummated sexual intercourse with
her. Babanto was charged with rape, but the trial court did not find the accused guilty oas
charged. Instead, it found him guilty of the lesser offense of qualified seduction. The trial court
opined that considering the evidence on record, accused Babanto actually had sexual
intercourse with complainant Leonida Dagohoy but that such sexual intercourse was not
committed through the use of any violence or intimidation. Though it is true that virginity is
presumed if the girl is over 12 but under 18, unmarried and of good reputation, virginity is still
an essential element of the crime of qualified seduction and must be alleged in the complaint.
A conviction of the crime of qualified seduction without the allegation of virginity would violate
the petitioner’s right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.

HELD:

The Court is positive that the accused had sexual intercourse with Leonida Dagohoy, as
the fact is fully established. The evidence also shows that as a result of the sexual intercourse,
complainant Leonida became pregnant as can be shown by a medical certificate.

It is a doctrine well settled by the courts that in order to consider the existence of the
rape it is not necessary that the force and/or intimidation employed in accomplishing it to be so
great or of such character; it is only necessary that the force and intimidation used by the
culprit be sufficient to consummate the purpose which he had in mind.

In the instant case, considering the age, mental abnormality, and deficiency of the complainant
plus the fact that the accused-petitioner was at the time of the incident in uniform and with a
side arm, there was sufficient intimidation to convict for rape.
ELEUTERIO C. PEREZ, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and THE PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, respondents.

G.R. No. L-80838 November 29, 1988

FACTS:

Eleuterio Perez was able to have sexual intercourse with Yolanda Mendoza twice after
he promised marriage to her. As he did not make good on said promises, Mendoza filed a
complaint for Consented Abduction. The trial court found that the acts constituted seduction,
and so it acquitted him on the charge of consented abduction. Mendoza then filed a complaint
for qualified seduction. Perez moved to quash on the grounds of double jeopardy.

HELD:

It is true that the two offenses for which the petitioner was charged arose from the
same facts. This, however does not preclude the filing of another information against him if
from those facts, two distinct elements, arose.

There are similar elements between Consented Abduction and Qualified Seduction,
namely: (1) the offended party is a virgin, and (2) over 12 but under 18 years of age.
However, there are other elements which differentiate the two crimes. Consented abduction
requires (1) the taking away of the victim without her consent, aftrer solicitation or cajolery
from the offender, and, (2) the taking away while qualified seduction requires that (1) there be
abuse of authority, confidence or relationship, and, (2) the offender had sexual intercourse with
the woman. Thus, an acquittal for consented abduction will not preclude the filing of a charge
for qualified seduction, because the elements of the two crimes are different.