Art. 342. Forcible abduction. — The abduction of any woman against her will
and with lewd designs shall be punished by reclusion temporal. The same penalty shall be imposed in every
case, if the female abducted be under twelve years of age.
Elements
1. That the person abducted is any woman,
regardless of her age, civil status or reputation;
2. That
the abduction is against her will;
3. That
the abduction is with lewd designs.
Any woman
• The woman abducted may be married since
Article 342 mentions “any woman” as the victim of the crime.
• The virginity of the woman is not an
essential element of the crime of forcible abduction.
Crimes against chastity
where age and reputation of victim are IMMATERIAL:
1. Rape
2. Acts of lasciviousness against the will or
without the consent of the offended party
3. Qualified seduction of sister or descendant
4.
Forcible abduction
Against her will
• The taking away of the woman must be against her will, when force or intimidation is used by the offender.
• The taking away of the woman must be against her will, when force or intimidation is used by the offender.
• The
taking away of the woman may be accomplished by means of deceit first and then
by means of violence
• Thus, when the defendant, who has served as
intermediary between the lovers, told the woman that her lover was awaiting her
at a spot near the growth of sugar cane for the purpose of joining her and
eloping with her which was NOT true, and upon arriving at the place, defendant
caught her by the hand and gave her a slap, and dragged her into the midst of
sugar cane growing , where, threatening her with a dagger he succeeded in lying
with her. (US v. De Vivar)
• NOTE: Defendant should have been prosecuted
and punished for the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape.
Crime is forcible abduction if female abducted is under 12
• If the female abducted is under 12, the crime is always forcible abduction with or without the consent of the child. The reason for this, is that she has no will of her own, therefore, is incapable of giving consent.
• If the female abducted is under 12, the crime is always forcible abduction with or without the consent of the child. The reason for this, is that she has no will of her own, therefore, is incapable of giving consent.
Lewd design
• Sexual
intercourse is not necessary in forcible abduction. The intent to seduce being
sufficient.
• Lewd
designs may be shown by the conduct of the accused
• Lewd
designs present in hurried ceremony of marriage by force
• Where the ceremony of the marriage is merely
an artifice by which the accused sought to escape the criminal consequences of
his acts, the intention to contract marriage constitutes lewd designs, as where
the offender knows that the girl cannot give consent legally to the marriage
because of minority.
• Intention
to marry does not constitute unchaste designs when both defendant and the woman
have the required age for consenting to the marriage
• NOTE: The offended party in People v.
Crisostomo, was 30 years of age. The intention to marry on the part of the
accused was not considred as constitutive of unchaste design.
• When
there are several defendants, it is enough that one of them had lewd designs,
as long as the same was known to the others who cooperated in the commission of
the felony.
• Husband
not liable for abduction of his wife, as the element of unchaste or lewd design
is wanting.
Nature
of the crime of forcible abduction
•
The act of the offender is violative of the individual liberty of the abducted,
her honor and reputation, and of public order.
Forcible
abduction vs. grave coercion
• In both crimes, there is violence or
intimidation used by the offender and the offended party is compelled to do
something against her will.
• When there is no lewd design, it is
coercion, provided that there is no deprivation of liberty for appreciable
length of time.
Forcible
abduction distinguished from corruption of minors
•
Where a 13-year old girl was abducted by the accused without lewd designs on
his part, but for the purpose of lending her to illicit intercourse with
others, the crime committed by the accused was held to be not abduction but
corruption of minors.
When
there is deprivation of liberty and no lewd designs, it is kidnapping and
serious illegal detention.
Forcible
abduction with rape
• A, B, C and others grabbed a girl, 15 years
of age and then dragged her to a nearby forest. There, she was brutally
ravished, first by A and afterwards by B.
Held:
The crime is not kidnapping with rape, but forcible abduction with rape. When
the violent taking of a woman is motivated by lewd designs, forcible abduction
is the offense. When it is not so motivated, such taking constitutes
kidnapping. One is offense against chastity, the other against personal
liberty.
• Only when the rape is consummated can the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape be committed. There is no complex crime of forcible abduction with acts of lasciviousness because the latter is an element thereof; in that case, the crime is Forcible Abduction only as the acts of lasciviousness is an outward manifestation of the lewd designs.
Forcible Abduction with Rape is complex crime if the taking of the woman amounts to forcible abduction and thereafter she was abused. In People vs. Bacalso and People vs. Jose, only one of the several rapes was complexed with Forcible Abduction. The other rapes were charged separately as one count each.
In contrast, Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention with Rape is NOT a complex crime. When the taking of the woman amounts to Kidnapping and thereafter raped, the rape is a qualifying circumstance.
When there is conspiracy, each co-conspirator will be responsible for his own and for other's rape.
• Only when the rape is consummated can the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape be committed. There is no complex crime of forcible abduction with acts of lasciviousness because the latter is an element thereof; in that case, the crime is Forcible Abduction only as the acts of lasciviousness is an outward manifestation of the lewd designs.
Forcible Abduction with Rape is complex crime if the taking of the woman amounts to forcible abduction and thereafter she was abused. In People vs. Bacalso and People vs. Jose, only one of the several rapes was complexed with Forcible Abduction. The other rapes were charged separately as one count each.
In contrast, Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention with Rape is NOT a complex crime. When the taking of the woman amounts to Kidnapping and thereafter raped, the rape is a qualifying circumstance.
When there is conspiracy, each co-conspirator will be responsible for his own and for other's rape.
There
is no complex crime of forcible abduction with attempted rape
• The attempt to rape is absorbed by the
abduction, being the element of lewd designs of the latter.
Forcible
abduction only, or rape only
•
Abduction but the resistance of the woman to the alleged rape was not
tenacious, the accused would be guilty only of abduction
When will abduction be absorbed in the crime of rape?
• Rape may absorb forcible abduction if the
main objective was to rape the victim. Here, the offender held the victim by the arm, pushed her inside a waiting tricycle, and brought her to his house, where she was padlocked in a room to prevent her from escaping; the subsequent rapes committed on the victim who was released only the tenth day of her abduction were ruled to constitute only as many counts of rape (People vs. Shariff Ali El Akhtar, June 1999)
Attempted
forcible abduction
•
The accused, who previously made an attempt upon the chastity of the offended
girl, tried to take away in a
carriage, while she was standing at the door of her house. The accused did not
succeed in taking her because of the girl’s resistance and intervention of
policeman.
Held:
The offense was attempted abduction. The lewd designs were indicated by the
holding of the girl around her waist and by the attempt of the accused upon he
chastity of the girl on previous night.
Forcible abduction vs. acts of lasciviousness
• To prove lewd designs in forcible abduction,
actual illicit relations with the woman abducted need not be shown. Intent to
seduce is sufficient.
• In the crime of acts of lasciviousness, the
lecherous acts must have actually been committed.
• In the crime of abduction, the person
abducted must be a woman, while in the crime of acts of lasciviousness, the
lustful acts may be committed upon persons of either sex.
• One of these two crimes involves some
important act which is not an essential element of the other, so that the
conviction of one of them is not obstacle to that of the other.
Conviction of acts of lasciviousness, not a bar to a conviction of forcible abduction
Can there be consented abduction with simple seduction?
Conviction of acts of lasciviousness, not a bar to a conviction of forcible abduction
Can there be consented abduction with simple seduction?
• If the original intent was to induce the woman to sexual intercourse, the crime is simple seduction only. There must be a considerable interval between the consented abduction and seduction. Otherwise, the crime is simple seduction only.
If the original purpose is to take the woman with lewd designs, and the lewd designs led to sexual intercourse, the crime is only simple seduction, the taking is absorbed in simple seduction. But if after a considerable length of time after the consented abduction had been consummated and thereafter sexual intercourse was had with the woman, the crime is consented abduction with simple seduction may be committed.
If the original purpose is to take the woman with lewd designs, and the lewd designs led to sexual intercourse, the crime is only simple seduction, the taking is absorbed in simple seduction. But if after a considerable length of time after the consented abduction had been consummated and thereafter sexual intercourse was had with the woman, the crime is consented abduction with simple seduction may be committed.
Consented abduction vs. seduction
• In consented abduction, the gravamen is the alarm and disturbance to the parents and the family of the victim and the infringement of their rights. In seduction, the gravamen is the wrong done to the woman.
Sources:
Leonor D. Boado, Notes and Cases on the Revised Penal Code, 2004 ed.
Luis B. Reyes, The Revised Penal Code, Book II, 2001 ed.
0
Comments
