FACTS:
The accused, Ignacio Lagata, a provincial guard of Catbalogan, Samar, was in charge of 6 prisoners (Jesus, Tipace, Eusebio, Mariano, Labong & Abria) assigned to work in the capitol plaza of Samar.
Lagata ordered the prisoners to go to the nursery to pick up gabi. Not long afterwards, they were called to assemble. Epifanio Labong was missing so Lagata ordered the 5 remaining prisoners to go look for him.
Eusebio Abria said that while they were gathering gabi, he heard 3 shots. He was wounded by the 2nd one. They were already assembled by the 1st shot and that he did not see Tipace being shot. He said he ran away because he was afraid that he might be shot again and that his companions were also probably scared and that is why they r an.
Another prisoner, Mariano Ibañez stated that Epifanio Labong did not answer their call so Ignacio Lagata ordered to go look for him in the mountain. He said that Abria went to the camote plantation and found footprints and called on Lagata to inform him about t he footprints. When Abria told Lagata of the flattened grass and that he was unable to look for Labong, Ignacio Lagata fired at him and he was hit on his left arm. Abria told Lagata he was wounded and in turn, Lagata told them to assemble. assemble. Once they were assembled, Lagata cocked his gun and shot Ceferino Tipace. Mariano said that when he saw Tipace was shot, he ran away because he also could have been shot.
Eustaquio Galet, another detainee, received good treatment from Lagata though his testimony corroborated those of the other prisoners. Pedro Mayuga, chief of Samar Provincial Hospital & Gilberto Rosales, Sanitary Division president, verified the gunshot wound and that the death of Tipace resulted therein.
Ignacio Lagata, however, said that he fired his gun because the prisoners were running far fro m him when he already ordered them to stop. He said that he would be the one in jail if a prisoner escaped under his custody. Furthermore, he would be discharged from duty like the the others. He was hopeless already. Moreover, the picking up of gabi was not part of the prisoner’s work.
HELD:
Court ruled that Lagata should be sentenced for homicide and serious physical injuries. Appellant was entitled to the benefit of m itigating circumstance of incomplete justifying circumstance. (Art.11par.5, RPC)
RATIO:
It was clear that Lagata had absolutely no reason to fire at Tipace. The record does not show that Tipace was bent on committing any act of aggression or that he attempted attem pted to escape.
According to Lagata himself, Tipace was running towards and around him. How could anyone intending to escape run towards and around the very guard one was supposed to escape from?
Even if Lagata sincerely believed that he acted in the performance of his duties, the circumstances show that there was no nece ssity for him to fire directly against the prisoners as to wound them seriously and even kill one of them.
While custodians should take care for prisoners not to e scape, only ABSOLUTE NECESSITY would authorize them to fire against them.
