010 Eugenio v. Velez(CELAJE) 1.

Unaware of the death on 28 August 1988 of (Vitaliana Vargas Vitaliana for

G.R. No. 85140 | May 17, 1990 | Padilla, J. | Habeas Corpus brevity), her full blood brothers and sisters, herein private respondents
PETITIONER: TOMAS EUGENIO, SR (Vargases') filed on 27 September 1988, a petition for habeas corpus before
the RTC of Misamis Oriental (Branch 20, Cagayan de Oro City) alleging
RESPONDENTS: HON. ALEJANDRO M. VELEZ, Presiding Judge, Regional that Vitaliana was forcibly taken from her residence sometime in 1987 and
Trial Court, Branch 20, Cagayan de Oro City, CRISANTA VARGAS- confined by herein petitioner Eugenio in his palacial residence in Jasaan,
SANCHEZ, FELIX VARGAS, ERNESTO VARGAS, NATIVIDAD VARGAS- Misamis Oriental. Despite her desire to escape, Vitaliana was allegedly
CAGAPE, NENITA VARGAS-CADENAS, LUDIVINA VARGAS-DE LOS deprived of her liberty without any legal authority. At the time the petition
SANTOS and NARCISA VARGAS-BENTULAN was filed, it was alleged that Vitaliana was 25 years of age, single, and
living with petitioner Tomas Eugenio.
SUMMARY: Unaware of the death on 28 August 1988 of Vitaliana Vargas
(Vitaliana for brevity), her full blood brothers and sisters, herein private 2. The respondent court in an order dated 28 September 1988 issued the writ
respondents (Vargases', for brevity) filed on 27 September 1988, a petition for of habeas corpus, but the writ was returned unsatisfied. Petitioner refused to
habeas corpus before the RTC of Misamis Oriental (Branch 20, Cagayan de Oro surrender the body of Vitaliana (who had died on 28 August 1988) to the
City) alleging that Vitaliana was forcibly taken from her residence sometime in respondent sheriff, reasoning that a corpse cannot be the subject of habeas
1987 and confined by herein petitioner in his palacial residence in Jasaan, corpus proceedings; besides, according to petitioner, he had already
Misamis Oriental. When respondent Vargases finally learned of Vitaliana's obtained a burial permit from the Undersecretary of the Department of
death, they amended the habeas corpus petition by turning the petition into an Health, authorizing the burial at the palace quadrangle of the Philippine
issue regarding who has custody over the dead body. Petitioner Eugenio claims Benevolent Christian Missionary, Inc. (PBCM), a registered religious sect,
the RTC lost jurisdiction over the petition as granting the writ of habeas corpus of which he (petitioner) is the Supreme President and Founder.
is now a moot issue.
3. Petitioner Eugenio also alleged that Vitaliana died of heart failure due to
Issue: W/N a habeas corpus petition can be amended and turned into a case toxemia of pregnancy in his residence on 28 August 1988. As her common
regarding rightful custody of the dead body. Yes. (See Doctrine) Amendments law husband, petitioner Eugenio claimed legal custody of her body.
to pleadings are generally favored and should be liberally allowed in furtherance
of justice in order that every case may so far as possible be determined on its real 4. Petitioner Eugenio (as respondent in the habeas corpus proceedings) filed
facts and in order to expedite the trial of cases or prevent circuity of action and an urgent motion to dismiss the petition therein, claiming lack of
unnecessary expense, unless there are circumstances such as inexcusable delay jurisdiction of the court over the nature of the action under sec. 1(b) of Rule
or the taking of the adverse party by surprise or the like, which justify a refusal 16 in relation to sec. 2, Rule 72 of the Rules of Court.1 A special proceeding
of permission to amend. As correctly alleged by respondents Vargases, the writ for habeas corpus, petitioner Eugenio argued, is not applicable to a dead
of habeas corpus as a remedy became moot and academic due to the death of the person but extends only to all cases of illegal confinement or detention of a
person allegedly restrained of liberty, but the issue of custody remained, which live person.
the court a quo had to resolve.
5. Before resolving the motion to dismiss, private respondents Vargases (as
DOCTRINE After the fact of Vitaliana's death was made known to the petitioners below) were granted leave to amend their petition. 2 
respondents in the habeas corpus proceedings, amendment of the petition for
habeas corpus, not dismissal, was proper to avoid multiplicity of suits. 6. Claiming to have knowledge of the death of Vitaliana only on 28 September
1988 (or after the filing of the habeas corpus petition), private respondents
FACTS: (Vargases') alleged that petitioner Tomas Eugenia who is not in any way
related to Vitaliana was wrongfully interfering with their (Vargases') duty to
 bury her. Invoking Arts. 305 and 308 of the Civil Code, 3 the Vargases jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Courts over civil cases. Under Sec. 2, Rule
contended that, as the next of kin in the Philippines, they are the legal 102 of the Rules of Court, the writ of habeas corpus may be granted by a
custodians of the dead body of their sister Vitaliana. The motion to dismiss Court of First Instance (now Regional Trial Court).
was eventually denied.
2. It is an elementary rule of procedure that what controls is not the caption of
7. The lower court's decision stated: the complaint or petition; but the allegations therein determine the nature of
the action, and even without the prayer for a specific remedy, proper relief
a. . . . . By a mere reading of the petition the court observed that the allegations in the may nevertheless be granted by the court if the facts alleged in the
original petition as well as in the two amended petitions show that Vitaliana Vargas
complaint and the evidence introduced so warrant. 13
has been restrained of her liberty and if she were dead then relief was prayed for the
custody and burial of said dead person. The amendments to the petition were but
elaborations but the ultimate facts remained the same, hence, this court strongly 3. When the petition for habeas corpus was filed before the court a quo, it was
finds that this court has ample jurisdiction to entertain and sit on this case as an not certain whether Vitaliana was dead or alive. While habeas corpus is a
action for custody and burial of the dead body because the body of the petition writ of right, it will not issue as a matter of course or as a mere perfunctory
controls and is binding and since this case was raffled to this court to the exclusion
operation on the filing of the petition. Judicial discretion is exercised in its
of all other courts, it is the primary duty of this court to decide and dispose of this
case. . . . . 10 issuance, and such facts must be made to appear to the judge to whom the
petition is presented as, in his judgment, prima facie entitle the petitioner to
8. Satisfied with its jurisdiction, the respondent court ruled that the order of preference to give the writ. 
support under Art. 294 was used as the basis of the award. Since there was no surviving
spouse, ascendants or descendants, the brothers and sisters were preferred over petitioner 4. While the court may refuse to grant the writ if the petition is insufficient in
Eugenio who was merely a common law spouse, the latter being himself legally married to
form and substance, the writ should issue if the petition complies with the
another woman. 11
legal requirements and its averments make a prima facie case for relief.
ISSUES:
5. However, a judge who is asked to issue a writ of habeas corpus need not be
1. W/N the lower court retained jurisdiction over the case by treating it as an very critical in looking into the petition for very clear grounds for the
action for custody of a dead body, without the respondent Vargases having exercise of this jurisdiction. The latter's power to make full inquiry into the
to file a separate civil action for such relief, and without the Court first cause of commitment or detention will enable him to correct any errors or
dismissing the original petition for habeas corpus. Yes, after the fact of defects in the petition. 15
Vitaliana's death was made known to the respondents Vargases in the
habeas corpus proceedings, amendment of the petition for habeas corpus, 6. After the fact of Vitaliana's death was made known to the petitioners in
not dismissal, was proper to avoid multiplicity of suits. the habeas corpus proceedings, amendment of the petition for habeas
corpus, not dismissal, was proper to avoid multiplicity of suits.
Amendments to pleadings are generally favored and should be liberally
allowed in furtherance of justice in order that every case may so far as
RULING: WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is AFFIRMED. Both possible be determined on its real facts and in order to expedite the trial of
petitions are hereby DISMISSED. No Costs. cases or prevent circuity of action and unnecessary expense, unless there are
circumstances such as inexcusable delay or the taking of the adverse party
by surprise or the like, which justify a refusal of permission to amend. 18 As
RATIO: correctly alleged by respondents, the writ of habeas corpus as a remedy
became moot and academic due to the death of the person allegedly
1. Section 19, Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 provides for the exclusive original restrained of liberty, but the issue of custody remained, which the court a
 quo had to resolve.

7. Petitioner is not the spouse contemplated under Art. 294 of the Civil Code. Indeed, Philippine
Law does not recognize common law marriages.

8. Custody of the dead body of Vitaliana was correctly awarded to her surviving brothers and
sisters (the Vargases). Section 1103 of the Revised Administrative Code provides:

a. Sec. 1103. Persons charged with duty of burial.  — The immediate duty of burying
the body of a deceased person, regardless of the ultimate liability for the expense
thereof, shall devolve upon the persons hereinbelow specified:

b. x x x           (b) If the deceased was an unmarried man or woman, or a child, and left
any kin, the duty of burial shall devolve upon the nearest of kin of the deceased, if
they be adults and within the Philippines and in possession of sufficient means to
defray the necessary expenses.