Abandonment of person in danger and abandonment of one’s own victim, A275 Revised Penal Code
1. Concept
Abandonment of person in danger and abandonment of one’s own victim – refers to the crime of (a) failing to render assistance to any person whom he shall find in an uninhabited place wounded or in danger of dying; or (b) failing to help or render assistance to another whom he has accidentally wounded or injured; or (c) failing (i) to deliver an abandoned child under seven years of age that was found, to the authorities or to his family; or (ii) to take said child to a safe place.
a. Legal basis
Article 275. Abandonment of person in danger and abandonment of one’s own victim. – The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed upon:
1. Any one who shall fail to render assistance to any person whom he shall find in an uninhabited place wounded or in danger of dying, when he can render such assistance without detriment to himself, unless such omission shall constitute a more serious offense.
2. Anyone who shall fail to help or render assistance to another whom he has accidentally wounded or injured.
3. Anyone who, having found an abandoned child under seven years of age, shall fail to deliver said child to the authorities or to his family, or shall fail to take him to a safe place.
(Revised Penal Code)
2. Modes of commission
The following are the modes of committing the offense:
1) By failing to render assistance to any person whom he shall find in an uninhabited place wounded or in danger of dying;
2) By failing to help or render assistance to another whom he has accidentally wounded or injured; and
3) By failing (a) to deliver an abandoned child under seven years of age that was found, to the authorities or to his family; or (b) to take said child to a safe place.
a. Mode 1: Failing to assist person in danger of dying
Elements of the crime of Abandonment of person in danger and abandonment of one’s own victim – 1st Mode:
1) The offender finds any person in an uninhabited place wounded or in danger of dying;
2) The offender fails to render assistance to said person without detriment to himself, unless such omission shall constitute a more serious offense. (REVISED PENAL CODE, Article 275)
Element 1: Finding a person in an uninhabited place wounded or in danger of dying
For the 1st element, the offender finds a person in an uninhabited place wounded or in danger of dying.
The law contemplates a specific situation involving: (a) a person in an uninhabited place, and (b) he/she is wounded or in danger of dying. These two situations must go together. Hence, finding a person in an uninhabited place but is not wounded or in danger of dying would not fall under this situation. The same goes if the person is wounded or in danger of dying but he/she is in an uninhabited place.
Further, the law does not contemplate any further scenario on the party of the offender – only that he/she found the said person. To be clear, the mere chance or accident of finding a person in an uninhabited place wounded or in danger of dying would satisfy the first element.
Element 2: Fails to render assistance
For the 3rd element, the offender can render assistance without determinant to him/herself, unless such omission shall constitute a more serious offense.
The law does not expect a person to put him/herself in peril or at risk in order to help another person. Thus, if helping another person may result in the possibility of danger for an individual, then there is no such legal obligation to do so.
However, if there is no such detriment, then the law expects that the offender to have helped another person who is found wounded or in danger of dying in an uninhabited place.
b. Mode 2: Accidental wounding or injury
Elements of the crime of Abandonment of person in danger and abandonment of one’s own victim – 2nd mode:
1) The offender accidentally wounds or injures another; and
2) The offender fails to help or render assistance to the wounded/injured person. (REVISED PENAL CODE, Article 275)
Element 1: Accidentally wounds or injures another
For the 1st element, the offender accidentally wounds or injures another.
The operative word herein is – accident.
This means that there was no intent to cause a wound or injure another. Rather, the wound/injury resulted by chance or accident. For instance, a person hitting a baseball with a bat may result in the ball flying off and hitting a person on the head. The resulting wound/injury would clearly have been unintended.
However, it is a different matter if the wound/injure was done with malicious intent. Depending on the circumstances, this could result in a different offense such as physical injuries, homicide, or murder.
a) Contrasted with recklessness imprudence
Reckless imprudence consists of voluntarily doing or failing to do, without malice, an act from which material damage results by reason of an inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the person performing or failing to perform such act. (Gaid v. People, G.R. No. 171636, April 7, 2009, Per Tinga, J.)
Gaid v. People, G.R. No. 171636, April 7, 2009, Per Tinga, J.:
• At around 12:00 noon…, [the Accused] was driving his passenger jeepney along a two-lane road where the Laguindingan National High School is located toward the direction of Moog in Misamis Oriental. His jeepney was filled to seating capacity. At the time several students were coming out of the school premises. Meanwhile, a fourteen year-old student, Michael Dayata (Dayata), was seen by eyewitness Artman Bongolto (Bongolto) sitting near a store on the left side of the road. From where he was at the left side of the road, Dayata raised his left hand to flag down [the Accused]’s jeepney which was traveling on the right lane of the road.8 However, neither did [the Accused] nor the conductor, Dennis Mellalos (Mellalos), saw anybody flagging down the jeepney to ride at that point.
• The next thing Bongalto saw, Dayata’s feet was pinned to the rear wheel of the jeepney, after which, he laid flat on the ground behind the jeepney. Another prosecution witness, Usaffe Actub (Actub), who was also situated on the left side of the street but directly in front of the school gate, heard “a strong impact coming from the jeep sounding as if the driver forced to accelerate in order to hurdle an obstacle.” Dayata was then seen lying on the ground and caught in between the rear tires. [The Accused] felt that the left rear tire of the jeepney had bounced and the vehicle tilted to the right side.
• Mellalos heard a shout that a boy was run over, prompting him to jump off the jeepney to help the victim. [The Accused] stopped and saw Mellalos carrying the body of the victim. Mellalos loaded the victim on a motorcycle and brought him to the hospital. Dayata was first brought to the Laguindingan Health Center, but it was closed. Mellalos then proceeded to the El Salvador Hospital. Upon advice of its doctors, however, Dayata was brought to the Northern Mindanao Medical Center where he was pronounced dead on arrival.
• Dr. Tammy Uy issued an autopsy report stating cranio-cerebral injuries as the cause of death. She testified that the head injuries of Dayata could have been caused by having run over by the jeepney.
• The Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) of Laguindingan19 found [the Accused] guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged [reckless imprudence resulting in homicide].
• In the instant case, [the Accused] was driving slowly at the time of the accident, as testified to by two eyewitnesses.
• It appears from the evidence Dayata came from the left side of the street. [the Accused], who was driving the jeepney on the right lane, did not see the victim flag him down. He also failed to see him go near the jeepney at the left side. Understandably, [the Accused] was focused on the road ahead. In Dayata’s haste to board the jeep which was then running, his feet somehow got pinned to the left rear tire, as narrated by Bongolto. Actub only saw Dayata after he heard a strong impact coming from the jeep.
• With the foregoing facts, [the Accused] can not be held liable… for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide, as found by the trial court. The proximate cause of the accident and the death of the victim was definitely his own negligence in trying to catch up with the moving jeepney to get a ride.
• In the instant case, [the Accused] had exercised extreme precaution as he drove slowly upon reaching the vicinity of the school. He cannot be faulted for not having seen the victim who came from behind on the left side.
• If at all again, [the Accused]’s failure to render assistance to the victim would constitute abandonment of one’s victim punishable under Article 275 of the Revised Penal Code. However, the omission is not covered by the information. Thus, to hold [the Accused] criminally liable under the provision would be tantamount to a denial of due process.
• Therefore, [the Accused] must be acquitted at least on reasonable doubt.
Element 2: Fails to help or render assistance
For the 2nd element, the offender fails to help or render assistance to the wounded/injured person.
Considering that the offender was the one who caused the wound/injury, the law expects the offender to help or render assistance. This is particularly important if the wound/injury is serious or grave.
Of course, this should be balanced if the wounded/injured person adamantly refuses the offer of help from the offender. While the offender may have accidentally caused the wound/injury, the offender cannot insist in providing help where the wound/injured person vehemently denies such assistance, particularly if the wound/injury is not serious or grave. In such circumstances, courts will likely decide such a situation on a case-by-case basis.
b. Mode 3: Failure to deliver abandoned child
Elements of the crime of Abandonment of person in danger and abandonment of one’s own victim – 3rd mode:
1) The offender found an abandoned child under seven years of age; and
2) He: (a) fails to deliver said child to the authorities or to his family; or (b) fails to take him to a safe place. (REVISED PENAL CODE, Article 275)
Element 1: Lorem
For the 1st element, the offender finds an abandoned child under seven years of age.
The operative word here is – abandoned.
This is critical considering that there are many children under seven years of age who may be found alone in certain areas in the country, particularly in remote areas or in provinces. However, they are not abandoned; rather, the child may simply be traveling from or to school/home, roaming, or playing around. In these cases, the child cannot be considered abandoned.
Further, when in doubt, it is best to ask the child to determine the circumstances, particularly where his/her parents are, what he/she is doing, and other similar questions. These will give a fair indication of whether the child is in fact abandoned.
Element 2: Failure to deliver or keep safe
For the 2nd element, the offender either: (a) fails to deliver said child to the authorities or to his/her family; or (b) fails to take him/her to a safe place.
At the bare minimum, the law expects the offender to deliver the abandoned child to a safe place. This is to ensure the child’s safety, protection, and well-being. Considering the child’s tender age of being under seven years of age, he/she may not appreciate the dangers around him/her.
If practicable, the offender may also bring such an abandoned child to the authorities or to his/her family if known.
As discussed earlier, it is critical to determine first that the child is abandoned considering that a separate offense may be committed if turns out that the child is not abandoned. Thus, transporting such a child may result in the commission of kidnapping and serious illegal detention.
Accordingly, when in doubt, it is best to call the authorities.
3. Things to note
The following are some additional things to note about this offense.
a. More serious offense
[Articles 275 and 276] shall not prevent the imposition of the penalty provided for the act committed, when the same shall constitute a more serious offense. (REVISED PENAL CODE, Paragraph 3, Article 276)
This may include reckless imprudence resulting in homicide.
References
• Title IX – Crimes Against Personal Liberty and Security, Act No. 3815, Revised Penal Code, as amended
