PEOPLE vs.

SUBANO
G.R. No. L-48143 September 30, 1942
Pilos Subano and his wife Bankalot had
quarrels in two separate occasions. When the
wife refused to accompany him in the river to
catch fish, Subano dragged her and killed her.
Subano was charged with parricide. It
appeared that Bankalot was the third wife of
Subano.
The crime committed is homicide
and not parricide. Although the
practice of polygamy is approved
by custom among non-Christians,
polygamy, however, is not
sanctioned by the Marriage Law
which merely recognizes tribal
marriage rituals. The deceased,
being the third wife, is not the lawful
wife of the defendant and this
precludes conviction for the crime
of parricide.
Muslim husbands with several wives can
be convicted of parricide only in case
the first wife is killed. There is no
parricide if the other wives are killed
although their marriage is recognized as
valid. This is so because a Catholic man
can commit the crime only once, and
the Muslim would be punished and
penalized more than a non-muslim. If a
Muslim husband could commit this
crime more than once, in effect, he is
being punished for the marriage which
the law itself authorized him to contract.
Possible Question:

A Muslim man caught his

third wife in the act of sexual
intercourse with another
man. He inflicted upon them
less serious physical injuries.
Can the Muslim man invoke
the privilege under Art. 247 of
the RPC to exempt himself
from punishment?
 No, he cannot invoke invoke the privilege under Article 247 of
the Revised Penal Code to exempt himself from punishment.

In People vs. Subano, the Supreme Court held that the Muslim
husband with several wives can be convicted of parricide only in case
the first wife is killed. This is so because a Catholic man can commit the
crime only once, and the Muslim would be punished and penalized
more than a non-muslim.

In the same way, the Muslim husband can only invoke the
privilege granted under Article 247 only against his first wife. This is so
because a Catholic man can invoke the privilege only once, and the
Muslim would stand to be benefited more than a non-muslim.

Hence, the Muslim man cannot exempt himself from

punishment.
Possible Question:

Can a Muslim husband who

has several wives, invoke the
absolutory cause under Art.
332 of the RPC for the crime of
theft he committed against
the mother of his second
wife?
 No, he cannot invoke Article 332 of the Revised Penal Code as a
defense.

In People vs. Subano, the Supreme Court held that the Muslim
husband with several wives can be convicted of parricide only in case
the first wife is killed. This is so because a Catholic man can commit the
crime only once, and the Muslim would be punished and penalized
more than a non-muslim.

In the same way, the Muslim husband can only invoke the
absolutory cause under Article 332 for a crime he committed against
his first spouse or the latter’s ascendant and descendant, because he
would stand to be benefited more than a Catholic man.

Therefore, the Muslim husband cannot invoke the absolutory

cause to exempt himself from criminal liability for the crime of theft he
committed against his second mother-in-law.