G.R. No. L-38548 July 24, 1980
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellant, vs. PAULINO MABAG y LABADO alias “PAULING”, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The case involves the automatic review of a death sentence. The evidence established that on November 7, 1973, in Basey, Samar, accused Paulino Mabag and four armed companions went to the house of spouses Bartolome and Engracia Baclas. After initially demanding money and food, three of the men, including Mabag, went upstairs. They hogtied Bartolome and his stepson Romulo Mendova. The men then robbed the house, taking cash and valuables. Subsequently, inside a bedroom, Mabag and two others successively raped Engracia Baclas. After the assault, they further threatened the family and took additional savings. The victim reported the crime and was medically examined, with findings consistent with sexual intercourse. Mabag was arrested and executed an extrajudicial confession.
The accused was charged with and convicted of Robbery with Rape under Article 294(2) of the Revised Penal Code by the Court of First Instance of Samar, which imposed the death penalty. The case was elevated to the Supreme Court for automatic review, raising questions on the proper penalty and legal classification of the crime committed.

ISSUE

Whether the crime committed is the special complex crime of Robbery with Rape under Article 294(2) of the Revised Penal Code, or whether the rape should be treated as a separate offense under Article 335, thereby affecting the imposable penalty.

RULING

The Supreme Court, voting 7-4, modified the penalty. The Court held that the crime committed is the special complex crime of Robbery with Rape defined and penalized under Article 294(2) of the Revised Penal Code. The legal logic is that Article 294(2) creates a single, indivisible offense where rape is committed on the occasion of the robbery. The prosecution correctly filed a single information under this provision, and the trial court properly convicted the accused thereof.
However, on the penalty, the Court applied the ruling in People vs. Carandang (83 SCRA 125), which was controlling jurisprudence at the time. Carandang held that when the rape accompanying a robbery is qualified (as in this case, committed by multiple assailants), the penalty should be taken from Article 335 for qualified rape, not from Article 294(2). The rationale is that the penalty for the graver component crime (qualified rape) should be imposed. Nevertheless, for the imposition of the death penalty under Article 335, the presence of at least one qualifying circumstance must be alleged in the information and proven during trial. In this case, while the rape was committed by several men, the information did not specifically allege this qualifying circumstance. Consequently, the death penalty could not be imposed. The Court thus modified the penalty from death to reclusion perpetua. The conviction for Robbery with Rape under Article 294(2) was affirmed, but the sentence was reduced.