thank you for visiting my channel before we start please hit the Subscribe like and share buttons to receive notification of future presentations today's topic is the case of luisito pulido versus people gr number 220149 July 27 2021 this case supplements my earlier presentation on prejudicial question in this case the Supreme Court unbank exonerated the accused from Criminal liability for bigamy when during dependency of the bigamic case a Judicial Declaration of novelty of the first marriage was entered previous decisions had held that a person who contracts a second marriage without a prior Court Declaration of knowledge
of his first marriage was liable for bigamy even if the first marriage was subsequently declared void by the court in this case the Supreme Court tell that the requirement of a prior judicial Declaration of nullity under article 40 of the family code which is only for purposes of remarriage should not have been extended to criminal cases facts of the Case luisito pulido married Nora Arcon in 1983 and had a child together in 1984. years later pulido had an affair with Rowena Valera and they got married in 1995. in 2007 arkhon charged polido and valeda with
bigamy before the RTC hablas Pena City under the provisions of the revised Penal Code the crime of Bigham is committed by any person who shall contract a second or subsequent marriage while validly married to another defense was that both marriages were null and void arguing that his first marriage to Arcon was void for lack of a marriage license and his marriage with baledo was also void due to absence of marriage ceremony in April 2007 Balada filed a petition to annul her marriage with polido the RTC upheld the validity of bolido's marriage to arkon but declared
the marriage to baleda asanal and void pulido was convicted was acquitted of the crime on appeal the ca was not convinced that his first marriage was void for lack of a marriage license it ruled that even if the first marriage was void for lack of a marriage license one may still be held liable for bigamy if he or she enters into a subsequent marriage without first obtaining a Judicial Declaration of nullity of the first marriage the ca ruled that bigamy was consummated when pulido entered into the second marriage without his marriage with arkon being first
judicially declared null and void according to the ca the subsequent Declaration of nality of bully the second marriage with baleda for being bigamos would not exonerate him from Criminal liability for bigamy one may still be charged with bigamy even if the second marriage is subsequently declared null and void so long as the first marriage was still subsisting during the celebration of the second marriage hence the ca affirmed the June 2022-2009 decision of the RTC but with modification as to the Penalty imposed the case was then elevated to the Supreme Court while the case was pending
before The Supreme Court a judgment was entered by the artiste of Imus Cavite declaring the marriage between pulido and arkon as void of initial due to absence of a marriage license with this development the Supreme Court held that the petitioner should be exonerated from Criminal liability the high court stated that for bigamy to arise there must have been a prior valid marriage the fact that the judicial Declaration of nality was obtained after the accused had contracted the second marriage will still not give rise to bigamy because avoid marriage is inexistent from the very beginning with
respect to article 40 of the family code the Supreme Court held that its application to ibigami charge was not warranted by the express terms of article 40 the prior judicial Declaration abnality of the marriage is a requirement only for purposes of remarriage and that article 40 should not have been construed as imposing a requirement for the accused in a bigamy case to raise the defense abnality of the first marriage without a Judicial Declaration of nullity of the first marriage having been obtained the second marriage is rendered void of initial even though the first marriage is
also considered void of initio the only basis for establishing the validity of the second marriage is the judicial decree abnality of the first marriage hence for purposes of remarriage polid was required to obtain a Judicial degree abnality of his first marriage as provided on the article 40 of the family code AS regards the bigamy case however pulido May raise the defense of a void of initial marriage even without obtaining a Judicial Declaration of absolutility the Supreme Court ruled in this wise after a careful consideration Discord is constrained to abandon our earlier rulings that a Judicial
Declaration of absolute nullity of the first and or second marriages cannot be raised as a defense by the accused in a criminal prosecution for bigamy we hold that a Judicial Declaration of absolutely is not necessary to prove avoid of initial prior and subsequent marriages in a bigamy case consequently a Judicial Declaration of absolutely of the first and or second marriages presented by the accused in the prosecution for bigamy is a valid defense irrespective of the time within which they were secured being in existent under the eyes of the law the knowledge of avoid marriage can
be maintained in any proceeding in which the fact of marriage may be material either direct or collateral in any civil court between any parties at any time whether before or after the death of either or both the spouses avoid marriage is ipso facto void without need of any judicial Declaration of nullity the only recognized exception under existing law is article 40 of the family code where a marriage void abinitio is deemed valid for purposes of remarriage hence necessitating a Judicial Declaration of nullity before one can contract a subsequent marriage the accused in a bigamy case
may validly raise a void of initial second or subsequent marriage even without a Judicial Declaration of nullity through a marriage is presumed to be valid even if the same is void of an issue without a Judicial Declaration of its absolutely in view of article 40 of the family code however the accused in a bigamy case should not be denied the right to interpose the defense of avoid abenation marriage which effectively retroacts to the date of the celebration of the first marriage if you find this presentation helpful please hit the Subscribe like and share buttons to
receive notification of future presentations thank you
