Benjamin B. Bangayan, Jr. V. Sally Go Bangayan G.R No. 172777

BENJAMIN B. BANGAYAN, JR. v.
SALLY GO BANGAYAN
G.R No. 172777
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Consolidated petitions for review in certiorari; Stemmed from a complaint-affidavit
by respondent, Sally Go-Bangayan accusing Benjamin Bangayan Jr. of having committed the
crime of bigamy.
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS
That on March 7, 1982 Benjamin married Sally and had two children. Later on, she
found out that he had taken in his concubine a certain Resally De Asis Delfin whom he
subsequently married on January 5, 2001 under the false name Benjamin Z. Sojayco and
fathered two children. She then discovered that on September 10, 1972, Benjamin also
married Azucena Alegre.
The city prosecutor issued a resolution recommending the filing of information for
bigamy against Benjamin and Resally with which after arraignment, both petitioners
pleaded not guilty and filed separately their respective motions for leave to file a demurer
to evidence on September 8, 2003 which was granted by the RTC.
The RTC dismissed the criminal case against Benjamin and Resally for insufficiency
of evidence on Dec. 3, 2003. Sally on the other hand, elevated the case to CA, promulgating a
decision granting Sally’s petition on Mar. 14, 2006 and ordering a remand of the case to the
RTC for further proceedings.

PETITIONER’S ARGUMENT
He was not legally married to Sally Go because of the existence of his prior marriage
to Azucena and that his marriage to Sally is inexistent due to the fact that no marriage
license was issued to both of them; that the prosecution failed and was unable to prove and
show and he and Benjamin Z. Sojayco were one and the same person; that he used a
fictitious name to contract marriage with Resally.
RESPONDENT’S ARGUMENT
That on Sept. 1979, Benjamin married Azucena and while the latter was outside the
Philippines, Benjamin developed a romantic relationship with Sally. His father was against
it so in order to appease her father, they signed a marriage contract on March 1982. That
she have sufficient evidence of the alleged bigamy against Benjamin, such as the existence
of three marriages to her, Azucena, and Resally; the letters and love notes from Benjamin to
Resally and his admission of having a relationship with the latter.
THE ISSUE/s
1. Whether Sally Go had the legal standing to file a petition for certiorari before the CA
despite the lack of consent of either the OSG or the OCP of Caloocan
2. Whether petitioners’ right against double jeopardy was violated by the CA when it
reversed the decision of RTC dismissing the case against them
3. Whether the petitioners are guilty of the crime of bigamy
THE RULING
1. Petitioner Sally Go had no personality to file the petition for certiorari before CA
because the case against Benjamin and Resally is criminal in nature. It being so, only
the OSG or the OCP of Caloocan may question the RTC order of dismissal of the case.
That only OSG and not private offended party has the authority to question the order
granting to demurrer to evidence in a criminal case.
2. The order of dismissal issued by the RTC on the ground of insufficiency of evidence
is a judgment of acquittal, thus, the prosecution is barred from appealing to the RTC
order because it violated the petitioners’ right against double jeopardy. The CA erred
in ordering the remand of the case to the lower court for further proceedings
because it disregarded the constitutional proscription on the prosecution of the
accused for the same offense
3. That the petitioners are not guilty of the crime of bigamy, for its elements are:
i. that the offender has been legally married
ii. that the marriage has not been legally dissolved or, in case his or her spouse
is absent, the absent spouse could not yet be presumed dead according to the
civil code
iii. that he contracts a second or subsequent marriage
iv. that the second or subsequent marriage has all the essential requisites for
validity
In this case, the 4th element is not present. The marriage license presented was not
authentic and the marriage between them was merely in jest and never complied
with the essential requisites of marriage.

Benjamin B. Bangayan, Jr. V. Sally Go Bangayan G.R No. 172777

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Benjamin B. Bangayan, Jr. V. Sally Go Bangayan G.R No. 172777

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Benjamin B. Bangayan, Jr. V. Sally Go Bangayan G.R No. 172777

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BENJAMIN B. BANGAYAN, JR. v.

G.R No. 172777

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Consolidated petitions for review in certiorari; Stemmed from a complaint-affidavit

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS

married Azucena Alegre.

to evidence on September 8, 2003 which was granted by the RTC.

RTC for further proceedings.

fictitious name to contract marriage with Resally.

Resally and his admission of having a relationship with the latter.

reversed the decision of RTC dismissing the case against them

3. Whether the petitioners are guilty of the crime of bigamy

granting to demurrer to evidence in a criminal case.

because it disregarded the constitutional proscription on the prosecution of the

accused for the same offense

i. that the offender has been legally married

iii. that he contracts a second or subsequent marriage

with the essential requisites of marriage.

You might also like