MORIGO Against. Some body
FACTS: Each other accessible to marry, thus they were married on August 30, 1990 at the Iglesia de Filipina Nacionalat Catagdaan, Pilar, Bohol.
On August 19, 1991, Lucia recorded on Ontario Legal (Standard Division) a petition to own divorce proceedings up against appellant that has been supplied because of the legal on January 17, 1992 and to take effect on February 17, 1992.
On October 4, 1992, appellant Lucio Morigo married Maria Jececha Lumbago at the Virgen sa Barangay Parish, Tagbilaran City, Bohol.
Providing it dispute to their analytical end, having court objectives, petitioner was not hitched in order to Lucia at that time he contracted the marriage having Maria Jececha
On September 21, 1993, implicated filed a problem for judicial report out of nullity away from matrimony on the Local Demo Legal from Bohol, docketed as Civil Case Zero. 6020. This new criticism look for (sic) among others, the newest statement regarding nullity from accused’s marriage that have Lucia, on to the ground you to no wedding ceremony in fact took place.
ISSUE: Claimed Morigo must have registered report for the nullity of his marriage having Barrete in advance of their next y circumstances.
RATIO: In idea of retroactivity away from a wedding becoming proclaimed void abdominal initio, the 2 was never ever partnered right from the start. Brand new package from relationships was null; it bears no court effect. The latest existence and the legitimacy of the earliest matrimony becoming an crucial element of the fresh new offense regarding bigamy, it’s but analytical you to definitely a belief having told you offense usually do not feel sustained where there’s absolutely no first relationships to dicuss regarding. The newest petitioner, need, perforce be acquitted of your own instant costs.
The present case is analogous to, but must be distinguished from Mercado v. Tan . . In the latter case, the judicial declaration of nullity of the first marriage was likewise obtained after the second marriage was already celebrated. We held therein that:
An official report from nullity off a previous wedding required before a consequent you can end up being lawfully contracted. Person who enters a consequent matrimony rather than very first getting such judicial y. That it idea enforce even if the earlier partnership is described as laws and regulations as the void.
It contains worrying even in the event you to during the Negocio, the first wedding was actually solemnized not only just after, however, double: very first in advance of a judge where a marriage certificate is duly provided following once again six months afterwards prior to a good priest within the spiritual rites. Ostensibly, at the least, the initial marriage appeared to provides went down, even when afterwards proclaimed emptiness abdominal initio.
Regarding the instant instance, however, zero wedding ceremony after all try did because of the a properly registered solemnizing officer. Petitioner and Lucia Barrete only signed a wedding price on the own. The fresh new simple private act out of finalizing a wedding price holds no semblance to a legitimate wedding and thus, requires zero judicial declaration out of nullity. Such as work by yourself, as opposed to so much more, cannot be deemed so you can compose an evidently good matrimony which petitioner might possibly be held liable for bigamy except if he first protects an official declaration out-of nullity prior to he deals a subsequent relationship.
The law abhors an injustice and the Court is mandated to liberally construe a penal statute in favor of an accused and weigh every circumstance in favor of the presumption of innocence to ensure that justice is done. Underneath the affairs of one’s introduce instance, we stored you to definitely petitioner has never the amount of time bigamy. Further, we also find that we need not tarry on the issue of the validity of his defense of good faith or lack of criminal intent, which is now moot and academic.