1401

People v. Abala
GR 135858
July 23, 2002
FACTS:
Antonio Abala was charged before the RTC of Laguba with rape in 4 informations.
Private complainant, Lea Abala is his 13-year old niece. During trial, the accused pleaded not
guilty. The accused is the brother of the victims mom. The victim recalled that one night the
accused entered her room and woke her up, covered her mouth with his left hand and poked a
knife at her. He dragged her out of the house and brought her to his house. She went with him
because she feared he would maul her just like what he used to do to his children. When he
removed her clothes, she fought back by kicking and striking him with her hands, subsequently
mounting her and had sexual intercourse with her. The next incident occurred the following
week, with the same procedure. The private complainant kept silent about the 2 rape incidents
because the accused threatened he would kill her mother. Upon the 3rd commission of rape, the
17-year old son of the accused, Meliton Abala, saw her in the house of the accused. After the 4th
rape, the mother of the victim confronted the private complainant with the report she got from
Meliton, after confirmation her mother helped in lodging the 4 informations for the crime of
rape. The defense stated that the accused never saw the victim for the whole month where the
days fall, for the alleged commission of the crime, but despite this, the trial court still found
Abala guilty, hence this petition.
ISSUES:
1. Whether or not the lower court erred in considering Lea Abala as a credible witness.
HELD:
1. No.
The appellant argued that he could not have dragged the victim out of her aunts house 4 times
without being noticed by its occupants. He was raising the possibility that the victim could have
easily shouted to call for help, and that he could not have brought her to his house for his
children were living with him. Also, he states that he could have been easily identified. The
Court rejects the argument of the appellant for the private complainants accounts of the rape
incidents were straightforward, clear and concise, indicating that she was telling the truth when
she testified in court. The Court adopted the finding of the trial court, stating that there was no
alleged reason why the victim, a young and unmarried girl, would expose herself to
embarrassment to allege the happening of the rape and submit to a private examination of her
private parts. The Court added that there was nothing unusual with the fact that the appellant
followed the same method in molesting the private complainant. Also, the possibility that the
victim could have shouted for help does not make her less credible as a witness, since she was
threatened, the accused having a knife with him.
The accused also questions the fact that the victim was not able to state the exact dates, but the
Court stated that in rape cases, the exact dates are not material elements of the offense. Nor can
the appellant claim that he was prejudiced by the testimony of the private complainant. His only
defense is a general denial that he never encountered the private complainant in the whole month
of May 1997. His counsel was able to cross-examin the private complainant on the dates she
was abused by the appellant.
Prepared by: Jo-Anne D. Coloquio

1401

Prepared by: Jo-Anne D. Coloquio