People v. Nosce
People v. Nosce
People v. Nosce
SYLLABUS
DECISION
AVANCEÑA, C.J : p
For having slapped the Reverend Father Ulric Arcand, a Catholic priest,
before a large congregation, the appellant Antonio Nosce was sentenced to
from four months of arresto mayor, as the minimum, to two years and four
months of prision correccional, as the maximum penalty, with costs.
The offended party, Reverend Father Ulric Arcand, was the chaplain of
the Catholic Youth in the municipality of Lucena, Tayabas, and had his
residence in said municipality. Some disgruntled residents were working for
his transfer to another municipality. On December 3, 1933, Mgr. Verzosa, the
Catholic Bishop of the Diocese of Lipa, was on a pastoral visit in the
municipality of Lucena and, taking advantage of his presence there, those
who were against the offended party staged a public demonstration, held a
meeting, and even sent a delegation headed by the appellant to seek an
audience with the bishop and express their desire to have the offended party
transferred to another municipality. On the afternoon of that day the bishop
administered the sacrament of confirmation in the parish church and later,
while he was leaving the church preceded by the priests in attendance,
among them the offended party, and while he was presenting his pastoral
ring to be kissed by the faithful who thronged the passageway, the appellant
arrived. At that moment the offended party was at the main door of the
church looking outward and trying to locate the car that was to take the
bishop to the convent. The appellant approached the offended party in an
attempt to speak to him but the latter told him that he had no time to talk to
him then, whereupon the appellant assaulted and struck him in the face with
his hand. Upon feeling the blow the offended party called to a policeman for
help and while the appellant attempted to pursue the offended party, one of
the persons present held and detained the former and put an end of the
incident. According to the appellant, when he tried to talk to the offended
party, the latter, who had his hand raised to about the level of his head,
made gestures of refusal to hear him and what he did was to repel the
offended party's hand. It was said offended party's own hand that touched
his cheek.
When the offended party was thus assaulted, he was in surplice which
is worn only during religious ceremonies. The ceremonies on said occasion
consisted in accompanying the bishop from the convent to the altar of the
church; then follows the confirmation ceremonies and later the bishop is
accompanied from the altar on his return to the convent. In going to the
church as well as on his return to the convent, the bishop is accompanied by
the faithful and the priests in procession.
The court declared that the facts stated constitute the offenses
punished in articles 133 and 359 of the Revised Penal Code.
Article 133 punishes anyone who, in a place devoted to religious
worship or during the celebration of any religious ceremony, shall perform
acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful. This court is of the
opinion that the appellant's acts do not constitute this violation. This article
is taken from article 241 of the Spanish Penal Code which reads as follows:
"The penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum and medium
periods shall be imposed upon anyone who, in a religious place shall
scandalously perform acts not included in the preceding articles, which
shall offend the religious feelings of the people present."
Furthermore, article 240, paragraph 1, of the Spanish Penal Code reads
as follows:
"The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods and a fine ranging from 250 to 2,500 pesetas shall be imposed
upon:
"1. Â Anyone who, by acts, words, gestures or threats, shall
insult the minister of any religion while in the performance of his
functions."
From these two provisions it may be inferred that the offense penalized
in the former does not include that punished in the latter on the ground that
both are punished separately. The appellant's acts fall under article 240 and,
therefore, are not punished in article 241 of the Spanish Penal Code.
Article 240 of the Spanish Penal Code was not adopted in our Revised
Penal Code but in lieu thereof there is article 359 which reads as follows:
"ART. 359. Â Slander by deed. — The penalty of arresto mayor
in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period or
a fine ranging from 200 to 1,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any
person who shall perform any act not included and punished in this
title, which shall cast dishonor, discredit or contempt upon another
person. If said act is not of a serious nature, the penalty shall be
arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos."
This court is of the opinion that the act committed by the appellant
falls under this legal provision. The offended party is invested with sacerdotal
dignity in his religion and was officiating as such priest during solemn
religious ceremonies before a large congregation. These certainly could have
been no other circumstances under which greater dishonor, discredit and
contempt could be cast upon him before the faithful over whom he held so
high a dignity.
Wherefore, by modifying the appealed judgment and taking into
consideration the serious nature of the crime charged, the appellant is
declared guilty in accordance with article 359 of the Revised Penal Code and
sentenced to from three months of arresto mayor, as the minimum, to one
year and one day of prision correccional, as the maximum penalty, with
costs. So ordered.
Street, Vickers, Imperial, Butte and Diaz, JJ., concur.
Separate Opinions
MALCOLM, J., dissenting:
It is agreed that while Father Arcand, the offended party, was coming
out of the church where he had assisted in conducting services, Antonio
Nosce, the accused, struck the father on the left cheek causing, however, no
injury. Nosce was prosecuted for this offense, and in the lower court was
found guilty of a violation of articles 133 and 359 of the Revised Penal Code,
and was sentenced therefor to suffer an indeterminate sentence of from four
months' imprisonment, arresto mayor, to two years and four months, prision
correccional. On appeal the accused is again found guilty under article 359
of the Revised Penal Code of an act of a serious nature, and is sentenced to
three months' imprisonment, arresto mayor, as the minimum, to one year
and one day, prision correccional, as the maximum. In my humble opinion,
however, the offense amounts simply to slight physical injuries punishable by
a fine not exceeding P50.
Under the present democratic system of government, in force in the
Philippines, neither on the military (U. S. vs. Smith [1919], 39 Phil., 533), the
church (U. S. vs. Morales [1917], 37 Phil., 364), or the Government (People
vs. Perfecto [1922], 43 Phil., 887), are conferred any special privileges which
make it a more heinous offense to assault a person associated with the
military, the church or the government than an ordinary citizen. It also
remains to be said that for having slapped the offended party. Antonio Nosce
has already been confined in prison for nearly one year. That is hardly an
approximation of justice.
HULL, J., dissenting:
I believe this offense falls within the second provision of article 359 of
the Revised Penal Code and not within the first section thereof.
Â
Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.
Alternative Proxies: