FIRST
DIVISION
THE UNITED STATES,
Complainant-Appellee,
G.
R.
No. 384
July
18,
1902
-versus-
AGAPITO
FORTIN,
Defendant-Appellant.
D E C I S I
O N
TORRES, J :
On the night of
the 15th
of February 1897, while several inhabitants of the Barrio of Talaonga,
in the Town of Bulusan, were gathered together in the town hall for the
purpose of electing subordinate officers, the presiding officer of the
meeting, Lucio Fusio, who was also the teniente of the barrio, and was
at that time drunk, got into an altercation with Agapito Fortin. The
trouble
was brought on by Fusio, who, approaching Fortin, bit him in the left
shoulder.
Against this aggression Fortin defended himself, throwing the teniente
to the ground, and as a result of the struggle Fusio suffered some
slight
bruises.
This act
would
constitute
the crime of an attack upon an agent of the authorities and not upon
the
authorities themselves, inasmuch as Fusio was not an authority, but was
only a cabeza de barangay and the teniente of the barrio; but in view
of
the fact that the commission of this crime has not been proven, the
provisions
of Article 249 and the last paragraph of Article 250 of the Penal Code
can not be applied.
It
appears from the
record that the provocation and the aggression were both on the part of
the teniente of the barrio, who while drunk bit the accused in the
shoulder
as stated above, and that the latter in repelling this aggression threw
the complaining witness to the ground, the latter being so drunk that
he
could not represent the authorities with decorum, and that in so doing
the defendant only acted in his personal defense against an unlawful
attack
made without provocation on his part and by means which were entirely
reasonable.
Therefore, the accused in so acting committed no offense and is exempt
from all responsibility, more especially because he simply defended
himself
against a ridiculous and improper aggression made by a drunken man,
who,
by reason of his drunkenness and because he was the aggressor, was
divested
of his character as agent of the authorities. the law can not grant
protection
to one who has himself been the first to violate it.
By
virtue, then, of
these considerations we are of the opinion that the judgment below
should
be reversed and the accused acquitted, the facts not constituting an
offense.
The accused being free from all liability, the judge below will act in
accordance with law with respect to the attachment of the property of
the
accused. The cost of both instances are adjudged de oficio.
Arellano, C.J.,
Cooper, Willard and Ladd, JJ., concur.
Mapa, J.,
absent
on account of illness. |