Aggravating Circumstances under the Revised Penal Code have an effect of increasing one’s penalty for the crime to its maximum period. However, such increase does not exceed the penalty next higher in degree, unless they, by law, qualify the felony. It should be alleged and charged in the information and be proven in the trial for it to be appreciated in the Court. Fire and Explosion or Derailment of Locomotive may be in the nature of a generic aggravating circumstances, if they themselves do not qualify the felony or are not absorbed thereof.
That said, among the aggravating circumstance that can increase one’s penalty for the crime to its maximum period is the commission of the punishable offense by means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, and derailment of locomotive. In certain felonies or crimes, these circumstances are appreciated as qualifying circumstances.
The Law | Fire and Explosion or Derailment of Locomotive
Under the Revised Penal Code, one of the aggravating circumstances is that: the crime be committed by means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, stranding of a vessel or international damage thereto, derailment of a locomotive, or by the use of any other artifice involving great waste and ruin.1
Elements
According to the rule that was presented earlier, the gravity of an offender’s crime is raised when the offense was committed utilizing any of the aforesaid means.
By means of fire – this constitutes as aggravating if “by means of fire” was used for the purpose of adopting such means in order to fulfill one’s criminal intent. Thus, when an offender killed an individual and place the latter on a house and burned such property, it constitutes two separate crimes since the act of the offender using fire was not his means to kill the individual.2
By means of explosion – like the first one, this constitutes as an aggravating if this was used for the purpose of adopting such means in order to fulfill such criminal intent.
To illustrate, if the offender throws a grenade inside a house from which a family resides with no intent to kill, but because of the said act, the house was damage due to the said explosion and cause a risk to the lives of the people residing on the said house, it will constitute as a crime of destruction pursuant to article 324 of Revised Penal Code.
On the other hand, if the offender throws a grenade in the same house which a family resides but with an intent to kill, and explosion was used as means to cause the death of those who are residing, it is murder.
By means of derailment of locomotive – like the prior two, this constitutes as an aggravating if this was used for the purpose of causing the fulfillment of an offense.
Thus, if the damage done by this means is to property only, this falls under Article 330 of the Revised Penal Code, Damage and obstruction to means of communication. Certain provision of Article 330 thereof has been amended by Presidential Decree 1613, when the object is a railway station. 3
On the other hand, if this was utilized, causing the death of an individual but without the intent of killing that person, this may constitute a complex crime of damage to means of communication with homicide. A single act that may produce two or more grave or less grave felonies.4
Whereas, if the use of this means results into killing an individual with intent to do so on the part of the offender, it falls as murder because the derailment was merely a means of used to kill the victim.
What is Article 14 Paragraph 12 all about?
The basis of this aggravating circumstance has reference to means and ways employed.5 Its application will vary depending on how the offender has used a method in a certain crime.
It should be clear that, if this aggravating circumstance is used as a means to accomplish a criminal purpose, it is an aggravating circumstance.
However, if another circumstance, under Revised Penal Code (as a general rule), already qualifies the crime, any of the following, i. e. fire, explosion, or derailment of locomotive, shall be considered as a generic aggravating circumstance only.
In an illustration, an offender killed his wife and child, the former has committed a crime of Parricide6 pursuant to article 246 of the Revise Penal Code, that said, he used as a means employed to commit his crime is “by means of fire” such method will constitute as an aggravating circumstance on the crime the offender committed.
On the other hand, murder7 is committed by any person not falling under article 246 (Parricide) that kills another employing certain circumstances; it includes Article 14 Paragraph 12 of the Revised Penal Code. Hence, if by “means of explosion” was used to kill a person, it qualifies the offense as Murder.
It should be noted IF this aggravating circumstance was already qualified under the crime of murder, it should not be considered to raise the penalty, this is in accordance with article 62 par. 1 of the RPC:
Aggravating circumstances which in themselves constitute a crime specially punishable by law or which are included by the law in defining a crime and prescribing the penalty therefor shall not be taken into account for the purpose of increasing the penalty.8
There are other crimes that are committed “by means of fire” in the crime of Arson (article 320); “by means of explosion” in the crime involving destruction (Article 324); and “derailment of locomotive” in the crime of damages and obstruction to means of communication (Article 330).
If these felonies are perpetrated, the aforementioned aggravating circumstances of fire, explosion, or derailment of locomotive do not serve as independent aggravating circumstances to increase the penalty. They are already inherent in the said punishable offenses.
Furthermore, Paragraph 12 is distinct from Paragraph 7. Crime is committed by means of “or any artifice” which may involve great waste or ruin under Paragraph 12. Whereas, under Paragraph 7, crime is committed on the occasion of a calamity or misfortune.9
Relevant Jurisprudence
In the case of People vs. Cabeltes:10
The aggravating circumstances of (1) the crime having been, committed by means of fire, (2) recidivism, (3) dwelling, (4) nighttime, (5) evident premeditation, and (6) treachery were found by the trial court to have concurred in the commission of parricide.11
The Supreme Court uphold the ruling of the Trial Court that an aggravating circumstance of “by means of fire” was present and was appreciated in the commission of parricide. The appellant in this case was found guilty for the crimes charged and has been proved guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
On the other hand, In the case of U.S vs. Burns:12
When the penal code declares that homicide committed by means of fire shall be deemed murder, it is intended that there should be actual design to kill and that the use of fire should be purposely adopted as a means to that end.13
The Court explained in this case that means by fire will not stand alone as an aggravating condition, but rather homicide perpetrated by means of fire. Therefore, it constitutes murder. Nonetheless, it must be sufficiently established that the use of fire was purposefully employed to consummate the crime.
Summary
To recap, this aggravating circumstance is applied to crimes committed by an offender in order to increase the penalty to its maximum period but not to the point of escalating to the next degree.
Because the basis of this aggravating factor refers to the means and methods used, unless the following circumstances in par. 12 is proven to have been utilized to achieve a criminal goal, they cannot be appreciated to augment the penalty to its maximum or to change the nature of the offense, as the case may be.
Conclusion
To conclude, as one of the aggravating circumstances, it may be appreciated in crimes committed by an offender, if such was the case. Yet, unlike other aggravating circumstances such as treachery, evident premeditation, use of superior strength, recidivism—which are always seen in criminal cases as generic ones—these circumstances is rarely seen.
Moreover, based in the annals of the decisions of the Supreme Court, they are either absorbed or appreciated as qualifying circumstances, such as in the case of Murder.
Nevertheless, on its own, these circumstances may be considered as an independent aggravating circumstance in crimes such as Parricide.
- Paragraph 12, Art. 14 of the Revised Penal Code[↩]
- People vs. Bersabal, G.R. No. 24532, December 11, 1925[↩]
- Article 330, Revised Penal Code; P. D. No. 1613, Section 3 [5][↩]
- Arts. 330 and 249 in relation to Articles 4 and 48 of the Revised Penal Code[↩]
- Revised Penal Code: Criminal Law: Book 1, by Luis B. Reyes, p. 387[↩]
- Article 246, Revised Penal Code[↩]
- Article 248, Id.[↩]
- Article 62, Paragraph 1, Id.[↩]
- Revised Penal Code: Criminal Law: Book 1, by Luis B. Reyes, p. 389[↩]
- L-38145-48 June 29, 1979[↩]
- Ibid.[↩]
- G.R. No. 16648, March 5, 1921[↩]
- Ibid.[↩]