[ G.R. No.

220149, July 27, 2021 ]

LUISITO G. PULIDO, PETITIONER, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.

May an accused indicted for Bigamy be exculpated on the basis of the judicial declaration of nullity of
his first or second marriage?

Facts:

 On 5 September 1983, Pulido (who was 16 years old then), married his teacher, Arcon (who
was then 22 years old) in a civil ceremony. The couple lived together until 2007 when Pulido
stopped going home. Arcon then confronted Pulido, to which Pulido admitted to his affair
with Baleda. Arcon also learned that Pulido and Baleda entered into marriage on 31 July
1995 where their marriage certificate indicated Pulido’s civil status as single.

 Consequently, Arcon charged Pulido and Baleda with bigamy in December 2007. In his
defense, Pulido argued and insisted that he could not be held criminally liable for bigamy
because both his marriages were null and void. He stated that his marriage with Arcon (in
1983) is null and void for lack of a valid marriage license, while his second marriage with
Baleda (in 1995) is null and void for lack of a marriage ceremony.

 Baleda, for her part, claimed that she belatedly knew of Pulido’s prior marriage with Arcon
sometime in April 2007. She added that even prior to the filing of the bigamy case, she
already filed a petition to annul her marriage with Pulido and on 25 October 2007, the RTC
of Imus, Cavite declared her marriage with Pulido as null and void for being bigamous in
nature. Baleda was acquitted but Pulido was convicted by the lower court. The Court of
Appeals affirmed the RTC decision. Pulido elevated the case to the SC.

Issue:

- Can Article 40 of the Family Code be given a retroactive application on his case which
requires him to obtain a judicial declaration of absolute nullity before he can contract
another marriage, otherwise, he can be prosecuted for bigamy, considering that Pulido’s first
marriage was contracted in 1983 or before the effectivity of the Family Code while his
second marriage was celebrated in 1995, during the effectivity of the said law?
- the main issue for consideration of this Court is the necessity of securing a judicial
declaration of absolute nullity as a valid defense in the criminal prosecution for bigamy.

Ruling:

1. The SC held that Article 40 of the Family Code applies retroactively on marriages celebrated
before the Family Code insofar as it does not prejudice or impair vested or acquired rights.
Thus, a judicial declaration of nullity is required for prior marriages contracted before the
effectivity of the Family Code but only for purposes of remarriage. In this case, “the SC
 recognizes the retroactive application of Article 40 of the Family Code but only insofar as it
does not prejudice or impair vested or acquired rights.

2. Hence, Pulido is required to obtain a judicial decree of absolute nullity of his prior void ab
initio marriage but only for purposes of remarriage. As regards the bigamy case, however,
Pulido may raise the defense of a void ab initio marriage even without obtaining a judicial
declaration of absolute nullity.”

Hence, Pulido's acquittal from the crime of Bigamy is warranted.