People vs Borja

GR No. 199710
Digested by: Marco Navarro

Doctrine: Article 267 Serious Illegal Detention. - Any private individual who shall kidnap or detain another,
or in any other manner deprive him of his liberty, shall suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal:

1. If the locking up or detention shall have lasted more than twenty days.
2. If it shall have been committed simulating public authority.
3. If any serious physical injuries shall have been inflicted upon the person locked up or detained, or
if threats to kill him shall have been made.

Facts:

This is an appeal on the Decision of the CA which found PO3 Julieto Borja guilty of kidnapping for
ransom.

At 10am on May 26, 2004, the victim Ronalyn Manatad and her friend Vicky Lusterio were walking along
Agham Road in QC when Borja suddenly grabbed Ronalyn and forcibly took her inside a gray van where
3 other men were waiting. Vicky was able to escape and she reported the incident to Ronalyn’s mother,
Adelina.

Adelina later on received a phone call from one of the kidnappers, demanding a P200k ransom for the
freedom of Ronalyn. Adelina informed them that they could not pay that amount and the caller hung up.
Some time later, the kidnappers called again and Ronalyn’s brother Edwin was able to negotiate a
reduced ransom of P100k.

At this point, Ronalyn was transferred from the van to a car.

Edwin sought the assistance of Sergeant Cordova of the National Anti-Kidnapping Task Force (NAKTAF),
who mobilized a team for an entrapment operation.

At around 12nn of the same day, Edwin received a call from the kidnappers instructing him to place the
ransom money in an SM plastic bag and proceed to the Wildlife Park in Quezon Avenue at 3pm. Edwin
informed Sergeant Cordova and the entrapment team positioned themselves within the area.

At 3pm in the Wildlife Park, PO3 Borja approached Edwin and took the SM plastic bag. Upon seeing the
exchange, the entrapment team arrested Borja and was brought to the NAKTAF headquarters. Despite
the successful operation, Ronalyn was not rescued.

While she was in the vehicle Ronalyn heard one of her captors say that PO3 Borja was caught. They
cursed her, “putangina yung kapatid mo, tumawag ng NAKTAF”. They took Ronalyn to PDEA and
charged her with illegal sale of shabu.

Defense

Borja claimed that on the day of the incident, he was in the RTC of QC to testify in a criminal case. Since
the hearing was postponed, he decided to go home at 12nn. At around 2pm, Borja received a call from an
unknown person instructing him to go to the Wildlife Park and meet Edwin who would be wearing a white
t-shirt and cap.

Borja proceeded to the Wildlife Park whereupon he met Edwin. 30 minutes later, 4 persons approached
Borja and apprehended him/
The RTC convicted him of kidnapping for ransom and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua. Upon
appeal, Borja claimed that Ronalyn was not deprived of liberty because she was lawfully arrested in a
buy-bust operation and charged with violation of RA 9165 (Dangerous Drugs Act).

The CA affirmed the RTC Decision. Hence this petition to the SC. Borja anchors his arguments on the
arrest and subsequent conviction of Ronalyn for the sale of shabu. He argues that it is absurd to convict
him of kidnapping considering that the alleged victim was found guilty of violation of Republic Act No.
9165 by both the Court of Appeals and the SC.

Issue:

Whether or not Borja is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of kidnapping punished under Art 267 of the RPC

Held:

YES. Ronalyn's apprehension for violation of Republic Act No. 9165 does not automatically negate the
criminal liability of Borja. The buy-bust operation carried out against Ronalyn and her kidnapping are
events that can reasonably coexist. Ronalyn's innocence or guilt would neither affirm nor negate the
commission of the crime of kidnapping against her. Therefore, the resolution of this case will depend
solely on whether the prosecution has established all the elements of kidnapping under Article 267 of the
Revised Penal Code.

A conviction for the crime of kidnapping or serious illegal detention requires the concurrence of the
following elements:

1. The offender is a private individual

2. That individual kidnaps or detains another or in any other manner deprives the latter of liberty
3. The act of detention or kidnapping is illegal
4. In the commision of the offense, and of the following circumstances are present:
a. The kidnapping or detention lasts for more than 3 days
b. It is committed by one who simulates public authority
c. Any serious physical injury is inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained, or any
threat to kill that person is made
d. The person kidnapped or detained is a minor, a female, or a public officer

Although the crime of kidnapping can only be committed by a private individual, the fact that the accused
is a public official does not automatically preclude the filing of an information for kidnapping against him. A
public officer who detains a person for the purpose of extorting ransom cannot be said to be acting in an
official capacity.

The essence of the crime of kidnapping is "the actual deprivation of the victim's liberty coupled with the
intent of the accused to effect it." It is not always necessary that the victim be imprisoned. The second
element of the crime of kidnapping is met as long as there is a showing that the victim's liberty of
movement is restricted.

Ronalyn was clearly deprived of her liberty as she was forcibly taken inside a vehicle by
accused-appellant and his cohorts and was driven around Quezon City for at least 5 hours.

The first two (2) and the last elements of the crime of kidnapping are present in this case, Ronalyn, a
woman, was forcibly taken by Borja and loaded in a van where she was detained for several hours. The
third element of the crime of kidnapping is also present when Borja and his companions tried to extort
ransom from Ronalyn’s family.

All the elements of kidnapping were sufficiently proven by the prosecution, which cannot be overturned by
Borja's bare denial and alibi. Wherefore, the Decision is affirmed.