People vs. Fabro (2017)

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. ZENAIDO FABRO

G.R. No. 208441, July 17, 2017 

TIJAM, J.:

Facts: In an Information, appellant was charged with Serious Illegal Detention under Article 267 of the RPC, in relation to Republic Act No. 7610, alleging that  accused, ZENAIDA FABRO feloniously and by force take AAA 9 years old, minor, while the latter is in front of the school whom the said accused detained and kept in the house of Brgy. Capt. Fabro, brother of the accused for a period of four days under restraint and against her will.

Denying the charge, appellant claimed that she brought AAA to Nueva Ecija with the consent of AAA's mother and teacher. She explained that she had intended to bring AAA along to the Barangay Captain to prove that her husband had taken her luggage and some documents, given that AAA used to clean their room. The Barangay Captain was not around so they proceeded to Nueva Ecija after AAA requested to join her. After two days in Nueva Ecija, she brought AAA to her brother's house where she was arrested.

Issue: Whether appellant is liable for Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention.

Ruling: Yes. The elements of Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention under Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, are: (1) the offender is a private individual; (2) he kidnaps or detains another or in any other manner deprives the latter of his liberty; (3) the act of detention or kidnapping must be illegal; and (4) in this case, the person kidnapped or detained is a minor, female, or a public officer. If the victim of kidnapping and serious illegal detention is a minor, the duration of his detention is immaterial.

There is no dispute that accused-appellant is a private individual and that she took AAA from her school on March 2, 2006, brought her to Nueva Ecija and kept her there until she was arrested on March 5, 2006. Leaving a child in a place from which he did not know the way home, even if he had the freedom to roam around the place of detention, would still amount to deprivation of liberty. Under such a situation, the child's freedom remains at the mercy and control of the abductor.

Ratio Decidendi: The curtailment of the victim's liberty need not involve any physical restraint upon the victim's person.15 For kidnapping to exist, it is not necessary that the offender kept the victim in an enclosure or treated him harshly.

Gist: This is an appeal from the Decision of  the CA, affirming in toto the Decision of the RTC, which found accused-appellant Zenaida Fabro guilty of Serious Illegal Detention.