AMANQUITON VS PEOPLE

(G.R. No. 186080, August 14, 2009)

Pro reo principle and the Equipoise rule

FACTS:

At 10:45 p.m. on October 30, 2001, petitioner heard an explosion. He together with two
companions responded to the place where the blast took place. Upon learning that Baaga was
the one who threw the pillbox that caused the explosion. Julius Amanquiton a barangay leader
together with Amante and Cabisudo chased and apprehended Baaga. On the way to the police
station, a named Gepulane suddenly appeared from nowhere and boxed Baaga in the face,
subsequently Gepulane was also apprehended.
Consequently, Information was filed against the apprehenders including Amanquiton and
later was convicted of the crime child abuse. Amanquiton appealed to the Court of Appeals.
However, the decision of the lower court was affirmed. Hence, this petition.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the RTC has accurately ruled the case against the petitioner?

RULING:

NO. The Court has found some flaws on the decision made by the inferior courts and when
there appear in the records facts and circumstances of real weight which might have been
overlooked or misapprehended, the Court cannot shirk from its duty to sift fact from fiction.
The Court applies the pro reo principle and the equipoise rule in this case. Where the
evidence on an issue of fact is in question or there is doubt on which side the evidence weighs,
the doubt should be resolved in favour of the accused. Whenever a penal law is to be construed
or applied and the law admits of two interpretations one lenient to the offender and one strict
to the offender that interpretation which is lenient or favourable to the offender will be
adopted. With all points taken into consideration the Court overturns the decision and acquits
the petitioner.