Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 37 views

    Bongalon v. People G.R. No. 169533. March 20, 2013

    Uploaded by

    law
    Bongalon v. People G.R. No. 169533 examines whether Bongalon is guilty of violating Section 10(a) of RA 7610, which prohibits child abuse, against Jayson dela Cruz. The court ruled that Bongalon's acts of striking and slapping Jayson did not constitute child abuse as defined in the law, as there was no intent to debase or degrade the child's dignity. While Bongalon's actions were not justified, there was no intent to harm the child as he lost self-control after his daughters were harmed. Therefore, the court found Bongalon guilty of slight physical injuries instead of child abuse.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Bongalon v. People G.R. No. 169533. March 20, 2013

    Uploaded by

    law
    37 views2 pages
    Bongalon v. People G.R. No. 169533 examines whether Bongalon is guilty of violating Section 10(a) of RA 7610, which prohibits child abuse, against Jayson dela Cruz. The court ruled that Bongalon's acts of striking and slapping Jayson did not constitute child abuse as defined in the law, as there was no intent to debase or degrade the child's dignity. While Bongalon's actions were not justified, there was no intent to harm the child as he lost self-control after his daughters were harmed. Therefore, the court found Bongalon guilty of slight physical injuries instead of child abuse.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    Bongalon v. Pp

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Bongalon v. People G.R. No. 169533 examines whether Bongalon is guilty of violating Section 10(a) of RA 7610, which prohibits child abuse, against Jayson dela Cruz. The court ruled that Bongalon's acts of striking and slapping Jayson did not constitute child abuse as defined in the law, as there was no intent to debase or degrade the child's dignity. While Bongalon's actions were not justified, there was no intent to harm the child as he lost self-control after his daughters were harmed. Therefore, the court found Bongalon guilty of slight physical injuries instead of child abuse.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    37 views2 pages

    Bongalon v. People G.R. No. 169533. March 20, 2013

    Uploaded by

    law
    Bongalon v. People G.R. No. 169533 examines whether Bongalon is guilty of violating Section 10(a) of RA 7610, which prohibits child abuse, against Jayson dela Cruz. The court ruled that Bongalon's acts of striking and slapping Jayson did not constitute child abuse as defined in the law, as there was no intent to debase or degrade the child's dignity. While Bongalon's actions were not justified, there was no intent to harm the child as he lost self-control after his daughters were harmed. Therefore, the court found Bongalon guilty of slight physical injuries instead of child abuse.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    1. Bongalon v. People G.R. No. 169533.

    March 20, 2013

    ISSUE: Whether or not Bongalon is guilty of violating Section 10(a), Article VI of the RA 7610
    against Jayson dela Cruz?

    In this case, Section 10(a) of RA 7610 states that,

    Section 10. Other Acts of Neglect, Abuse, Cruelty or Exploitation and


    other Conditions Prejudicial to the Child's Development. —

    (a) Any person who shall commit any other acts of child abuse, cruelty
    or exploitation or be responsible for other conditions prejudicial to the child's
    development including those covered by Article 59 of Presidential Decree No. 603,
    as amended, but not covered by the Revised Penal Code, as amended, shall suffer
    the penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period.

    Under the said law, “child abuse” as defined under Section 3 (b) of RA 7610 means,

    (1) Psychological and physical abuse, neglect, cruelty, sexual abuse


    and emotional maltreatment;
    (2) Any act by deeds or words which debases, degrades or
    demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being;
    (3) Unreasonable deprivation of his basic needs for survival, such as
    food and shelter; or
    (4) Failure to immediately give medical treatment to an injured child
    resulting in serious impairment of his growth and development or in his
    permanent incapacity or death.

    Under the said provision, for there to be child abuse, there must be an intent to debase,
    degrade or demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of the child.

    Applying this to the case at hand, Bongalon’s acts of striking Jayson with the back of his hand
    and slapping the latter on the face, did not constitute as an act which debases, degrades or
    demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as human being as those acts were just done
    at the spur of the moment or anger after his daughters suffered harm at the hands of Jayson
    and his father Roldan. The petitioner lost his self-control considering that he was concerned for
    his minor daughters’ safety. There was no specific intent to debase, degrade or demean the
    intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being that was so essential in the crime of child
    abuse.

    Hence, since the petitioner cannot be guilty of violating Section 10(a), Article VI of RA 7610
    from which he is being charged.

    Instead, the Court ruled that the petitioner should be guilty of slight physical injuries under
    Article 266(1) of the Revised Penal Code considering that the injury required five to seven days
    of medical attention.

    You might also like