THE Supreme Court has dismissed an adultery case, reiterating that only the offended spouse may file a valid complaint for private crimes such as adultery and concubinage.
In a decision written by Associate Justice Antonio Kho Jr., the Court’s Second Division reversed the ruling of a Regional Trial Court (RTC), reinstating the adultery case against Aurel Ann Chua-Chiba and Michael Llona.
The case stemmed from a complaint for adultery and grave threats filed by Jin Chiba’s representative against Aurel and Michael. Jin, the husband Aurel Ann, submitted his own complaint, which was attached as an annex to the complaint filed by his representative.
The Metropolitan Trial Court (METC) initially dismissed the adultery charge, ruling that only the offended spouse may file such a case. The RTC reversed the ruling and held that the filing was valid because Jin’s complaint was included in the records.
The Supreme Court disagreed. Citing Rule 110, Section 5 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure and Article 344 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), it stressed that adultery and concubinage are private crimes that may be prosecuted only upon a complaint filed personally by the offended spouse.
The Court said this requirement exists “out of consideration for the aggrieved party who might prefer to suffer the outrage in silence rather than go through the scandal of a public trial.” The law, it said, recognizes the right of the offended spouse to decide whether to pursue the matter in court or resolve it privately.
In this case, the Court ruled that the complaint was invalid because it was filed by a representative and not by the offended spouse, even if Jin’s own affidavit was merely attached as an annex. This, the Court continued, failed to satisfy the legal requirement.
