Patricia Anne M.

Martinez
Criminal Law II 1B
Judge Antonio Pangan
March 2016

Article 133: Offending the Religious Feelings

G.R. No. L-40577 August 23, 1934

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, plaintiff appellee,

vs.
PROCOPIO REYES, POLICARPIO NACANA, FLORENTINO CLEMENTE,
HERMOGENES MALLARI, MARCELINO MALLARI, CASTOR ALIPIO, and
RUFINO MATIAS, defendants appellants.

Facts:

On April 10, 1933, the defendants Procopio Reyes, Policarpio Nacana,

Florentino Clemente, Hermogenes Mallari, Marcelino Mallari, Castor Alipio,
and Rufino Matias arrived in front of a chapel located at the barrio of
Macalong in the municipality of La Paz, Tarlac. They carried with them bolos
and crowbars and began to build a barbed wire fence.
At that time in April 1933, between 11 and 12 in the nighttime, it was
Holy Week and a pabasa was ongoing. The committee chairman in-charge of
the said pabasa told these men with bolos to suspend their plans of building
a fence at that evening and told them it was improper to do so.
Due to the verbal quarrels which followed, the people who attended
the pabasa left the chapel hurriedly to the point where some benches fell
and dishes got broken. As a result, the pabasa was discontinued. It did not
resume until an investigation by the chief of police occurred the next day.
It was said that the Clemente family gave the land on which the old
chapel was erected by informal donation many years ago. There is now a
dispute as to whether this new chapel is now impinging on the land that
belongs to the Clemente family.

Issue:

Whether or not the defendants Procopio Reyes, Policarpio Nacana,

Florentino Clemente, Hermogenes Mallari, Marcelino Mallari, Castor Alipio,
and Rufino Matias are guilty of Article 133 of the Revised Penal Code

Held/Ruling:

The appellants are ACQUITTED of a Violation of Article 133 of the

Revised Penal Code but found guilty of a Violation of Article 287 of the
Revised Penal Code and are sentenced each to a fine of P75 with
subsidiary confinement in case of insolvency, together with the costs in both
instances.

Article 133 of the Revised Penal Code punishes acts "notoriously

offensive to the feelings of the faithful." Even though the construction of a
fence is deemed as irritating and vexatious, it is not such an act that can be
designated as notoriously offensive to the faithful.

In this case, the act of building a fence was considered innocent and
was merely to protect private property rights. As mentioned in the case, if
any offense was committed by the appellants, it is the violation of Article
287 or "unjust vexation" punished by arresto menor or a fine ranging from
5 to 200 pesos or both.