330 Phil. 824
ROMERO, J.:
"The undersigned accuses VICTORINO DEL MUNDO of the crime of rape, committed as follows:Finding that the complainant, the accused, the witnesses and the evidence in these six (6) cases are common to all the cases, the court a quo tried them jointly.
That sometime in October, 1993, at 8:00 a.m. or thereabout, in the City of Cabanatuan, Republic of the Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, motivated by lewd design and by means of force and intimidation, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of MARIVIC DEL MUNDO, a ten (10) year old child who is her (sic) natural child, against the latter's will and consent and to her damage and prejudice.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
Cabanatuan City, this 23rd day of August, 1994."
"xxx xxx xxxDr. Concepcion testified that the contents of and entries in the medico-legal report he prepared are true and correct, that is, there were abrasions, injury and lacerations at 3 and 9 o'clock positions and that the hymen was ruptured indicating a penetration of the vagina. The salient portions of Dr. Concepcion's testimony were quoted in the court a quo's joint decision, thus:
OCCULAR (sic) INSPECTION of the body plus the external reproduction organ
- Negative for any evidence of external physical injuries like hematoma nor abrasions.INTERNALLY
VAGINAL CANAL - with the use of gloves, nasal speculum with special lightened instrument.
(+) Abrasion, old, 3:00 o'clock and 9:00 o'clock.
(+) Whitish vaginal discharges with in the canal blocking the opening of the cervix
(+) Ruptured with remnants of the hymen within the vaginal opening.
IMPRESSION = Positive for history of vaginal penetration.
(Sgd.) JUN B. CONCEPCION
JUN B. CONCEPCION, M.D.
Medical Officer V
Medico-Legal Officer"
Thereafter, all documentary and testimonial evidence were offered by the prosecution and admitted by the Court. When the time came for the defense to present its evidence, complainant Marivic del Mundo was called as witness. She identified an affidavit of desistance executed by her dated November 17, 1994, the salient portions of which are hereunder quoted:
"Q And with respect to the examination of her external part of her sex organ, what are your findings? A There was evidence of external injury, sir. Q How about in the internal examination of the sex organ of the victim? A Internal examination shows that there was (sic) six penetration, sir. Q In this medico-legal report there is an entry here which says 'abrasion old 3 and 9 o'clock xxx’ Will you please tell us what does this entry mean? A 3 and 9 o'clock indicates the position of the injury sustained by the victim in her private internal organ, sir." (p. 6, tsn, hearing of Oct. 27, 1994) xxx xxx xxx "Q How about this last entry which I again quote: 'Rupture with remnants of the hymen within the vaginal opening." Tell us as to what this entry mean (sic)? A It simply means that if the hymen is ruptured there is penetration, sir. Q As a result of this medical examination conducted by you, what was your impression? A After that my overall impression, sir, that there is really a penetration, sir, of the vagina. Q That is your medical impression? A It is medical impression, sir, there is vaginal penetration." (p. 7, tsn, hearing of Oct. 27, 1994).[4]
"1. Na, ako ang siyang naghahabla sa isang asunto Kriminal na lalong kilala bilang Criminal Case No. 5981, 5983, 5977, sa salang Rape, People of the Philippines vs. Victorino del Mundo na nabibinbin dito sa Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Cabanatuan City, Branch III;Notwithstanding complainant's affidavit of desistance, the court a quo sentenced accused-appellant to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua in Criminal Cases Nos. 5977, 5978, 5980, 5981 and 5982, and death in Criminal Case No. 5983. Hence, these cases were elevated to this Court on automatic review.
2. Na wala na akong interest pang ipagpatuloy ang aking nasabing habla sapagkat matapos ang isang masusing palinawagan ay napagalaman namin na ang lahat ay bunga lamang ng hindi pagkakaunawaan at kami ay nagkasundo na;
3. Na, dahil dito ay magalang kong hinihingi sa Kgg. Na Taga-usig ng Lungsod ng Kabanatuan na pawalang bisa na ang aking nasabing habla o asunto."[5]
1. New and material evidence has been discovered which the defendant could not with reasonable diligence have discovered and produced in the trial which, when introduced and admitted, would probably change the judgment.Aside from Marivic's affidavit recanting her testimony, accused-appellant, thru his counsel, submits to this Court annexes to afford him the opportunity to establish his innocence of the crime charged and to warrant a new trial, the most important of which is Annex "L"[6]- Medical Report of the examination conducted on Marivic del Mundo by the NBI Medico Legal Division, bearing Living Case No. MG-95-993, dated August 30, 1995 re: determination of her physical virginity. The pertinent findings read:
2. Irregularities have been committed during the trial pre-judicial to the substantial rights of the defendant.
3. The principal witness and alleged victim has recanted her testimony which, if not considered, will result in a miscarriage of justice.
In our resolution of February 20, 1996, we resolved to require the Office of the Solicitor General to comment within ten days from notice. In its comment dated March 21, 1996, the Solicitor General interposed no objection to the motion for new trial in the interest of substantial justice."xxx xxx xxx
GENITAL EXAMINATION:
Pubic hair, fine, short, scanty. Labia majora and minora, coaptated. Fourchette, tense. Vestibular mucosa, pinkish. Hymen, tall, thick, intact. Hymenal orifice measures 1.0 cm. in diameter. Vaginal walls, tight. Rugosities, prominent.
CONCLUSIONS
Physical Virginity Preserved.
Approved: Examined by
(Sgd.) Alberto Reyes (Sgd.) Aurea P. Villena
Alberto M. Reyes Aurea P. Villena, M.D.
Chief Medico-Legal Officer
Noted:
(Sgd.) Prospero A. Cabanayan
Prospero A. Cabanayan, M.D.
Deputy Director, Technical Services"
In the case of Jose v. CA,[9] the Court held:WHEREFORE, we hereby SET ASIDE the judgment of conviction of accused-appellant Victorino del Mundo and REMAND the cases to the court a quo for a new trial only for the purpose of allowing said accused to present additional evidence in his defense. The trial court shall inform this Court the final outcome of the cases within a reasonable time. Without pronouncement as to costs.
"Surely, the Rules of Court were conceived and promulgated to aid and not to obstruct the proper administration of justice, to set forth guidelines in the dispensation of justice but not to bind and chain the hand that dispense justice, for otherwise, courts will be mere slaves to or robots of technical rules, shorn of judicial discretion.
Thus, admittedly, courts may suspend its own rules or except a case from them for the purposes of justice or, in a proper case, disregard them. In this jurisdiction, in not a few instances, this Court ordered a new trial in criminal cases on grounds not mentioned in the statute, viz: retraction of witness, negligence or incompetency of counsel, improvident plea of guilty, disqualification of an attorney de oficio to represent the accused in the trial court, and where a judgment was rendered on a stipulation of facts entered into by both the prosecution and the defense.
Characteristically, a new trial has been described as a new invention to temper the severity of a judgment or prevent the failure of justice."