Donato vs Luna

GR No. 53642, April 15, 1988

Petitioner: Leonilo C. Donato
Respondents: Hon. Artemon D. Luna, Presiding Judge, Court of First Instance of Manila, Branch
XXXIII, Hon. Jose Flaminiano, City Fiscal of Manila, and Paz B. Abayan
FACTS:
An information for bigamy against petitioner Leonilo Donato was filed on January 23, 1979 with the
lower court in Manila. This was based on the complaint of private respondent Paz Abayan. Before
the petitioners arraignment on September 28, 1979, Paz filed with Juvenile and Domestic Relations
Court of Manila a civil action for declaration of nullity of her marriage with petitioner contracted on
September 26, 1978. Said civil case was based on the ground that Paz consented to entering into the
marriage which was Donatos second since she had no previous knowledge that Donato was already
married to a certain Rosalinda Maluping on June 30, 1978. Donatos answer interposed the defense
that his second marriage was void since it was solemnized without a marriage license and that force,
violence, intimidation and undue influence were employed by private respondent to obtain
petitioner's consent to the marriage. Prior to the solemnization of the second marriage, Paz and
Donato had lived together as husband and wife without the benefit of wedlock for 5 years proven by
a joint affidavit executed by them on September 26, 1978 for which reason, the requisite marriage
license was dispensed with pursuant to Article 76 of the Civil Code. Donato continued to live with
Paz until November 1978 where Paz left their home upon learning that Donato already previously
married.
Prior to the date set for the trial on the merits of the Information for Bigamy, petitioner filed a motion
to suspend the proceedings of said case contending that the civil case filed by Paz Abayan seeking
the annulment of his second marriage raises a prejudicial question which must first be determined or
decided before the criminal case can proceed.
ISSUE: Whether or not a criminal case for bigamy pending before the lower court be suspended in
view of a civil case for annulment of marriage pending before the Juvenile and Domestic Relations
Court on the ground that latter constitutes a prejudicial question.
HELD:
Petitioner Leonilo Donato cant apply the rule on prejudicial question since a case for annulment of
marriage can only be considered as a prejudicial question to the bigamy case against the accused if it
was shown that the petitioners consent to such marriage was the one that was obtained by means of
duress, force and intimidation to show that his act in the second marriage must be involuntary and
cannot be the basis of his conviction for the crime of bigamy.
It must be noted that the issue before the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court touching upon the
nullity of the second marriage is not determinative of petitioner Donatos guilt or innocence in the
crime of bigamy. Furthermore, it was petitioners second wife, the herein private respondent Paz B.
Abayan, who filed the complaint for annulment of the second marriage on the ground that her
consent was obtained through deceit.