PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CHERINA DAYON, Accused-Appellant..

(G.R. No. 94704. January 21, 1993)

Facts of the Case:

One day, Private Complainant Marilou Peralta was called by the accused to go to the house of Tulio. Without taking
any meal, she went to the house and there, Peralta was arrested by 5 policemen. She was interrogated and forced to
sign a promissory note but the former refused. She was upheld in the house of Tulio and detained for 2 days without
any meal. The accused was charged with serious illegal detention. The accused argued that Peralta’s family were still
allowed to visit her; none of the visitors during that time complained about the alleged detention. A petition for
certiorari was filed beyond the Supreme Court.

Issue:

Whether or not Dayon is liable for the crimes charged.

Ruling:

This Court has held that in the crime of kidnapping or serious illegal detention, the offended parties "need not be kept
within an enclosure to restrict their freedom of locomotion . . . It is enough that they were in any manner, deprived
of their liberty, unable to move as they pleased

In the case at bar, three (3) other witnesses, aside from the complainant, her husband and her daughter, testified that
the accused did not allow the complainant to leave Mrs. Tulio’s house from the evening of 1 April 1988 until 3 April
1988. The trial court gave more credence to the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, over the defense version
that it was the complainant who voluntarily stayed at Mrs. Tulio’s house for two (2) days and refused to drink or eat
resulting in her being hospitalized.

Decision:

WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is hereby AFFIRMED with costs against the Appellant.