Teves v. People, G.R. No. 188775, August 24, 2011

FACTS: On 26 November 1992, a marriage was solemnized between Cenon Teves and Thelma Jaime-Teves After the marriage, Thelma left to work abroad and would only come home to the Philippines for vacations. In 2002, Thelma was informed that her husband had contracted marriage with a certain Edita Calderon. It was confirmed when she went to NSO and verified a marriage contract between her husband and Edita. In 2006, the uncle of Thelma, filed a complaint accusing petitioner Cenon of bigamy. During the pendency of the criminal case for bigamy, the RTC of Caloocan City, rendered a decision declaring the marriage of petitioner and Thelma null and void on the ground that Thelma is physically incapacitated to comply with her essential marital obligations pursuant to Article 36, Family Code. Said decision became final by a Certification of Finality issued on 27 June 2006. Petitioner Cenon appealed before the CA contending that the court a quo erred in not ruling that his criminal liability had already been extinguished. Petitioner claims that since his previous marriage was declared null and void, “there is in effect no marriage at all, and thus, there is no bigamy to speak of.”

ISSUE: Whether petitioner may be held guilty for the crime of Bigamy (Article 346, RPC) despite the judicial declaration that his previous marriage with Thema is null and void.

HELD: YES. The court held that it does not matter whether the case for declaration of nullity was filed before the case for bigamy was instituted, for as long as the offender contracted a subsequent marriage while his previous marriage is subsisting thereby not being able to secure a Declaration of Nullity of the First marriage. His contention that he cannot be charged with bigamy in view of the declaration of nullity of his first marriage is bereft of merit. A declaration of the absolute nullity of a marriage is now explicitly required either as a cause of action or a ground for defense. Where the absolute nullity of a previous marriage is sought to be invoked for purposes of contracting a second marriage, the sole basis acceptable in law for said projected marriage to be free from legal infirmity is a final judgment declaring the previous marriage void. Parties to a marriage should not be allowed to assume that their marriage is void even if such be the fact but must first secure a judicial declaration of the nullity of their marriage before they can be allowed to marry again. With the judicial declaration of the nullity of his or her marriage, the person who marries again cannot be charged with bigamy. A judicial declaration of nullity is required before a valid subsequent marriage can be contracted; or else, what transpires is a bigamous marriage, reprehensible and immoral.