ARTICLE.

294
Robbery with Violence
Against or Intimidation
of Persons
Art. 294. Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons - Penalties. - Any person guilty of robbery with
the use of violence against or intimidation of any person shall suffer:
1. The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death, when by reason or on occasion of the robbery, the crime
of homicide shall have been committed, or when the robbery shall have been accompanied by rape or intentional
mutilation or arson.
2. The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium period to reclusion perpetua, when or if by reason or
on occasion of such robbery, any of the physical injuries penalized in subdivision I of Article 263 shall have been
inflicted.
3. The penalty of reclusion temporal, when by reason or on occasion of the robbery, any of the physical
injuries penalized in subdivision 2 of the article mentioned in the next preceding paragraph, shall have been inflicted.
4. The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal in its medium period, if the
violence or intimidation employed in the commission of the robbery shall have been carried to a degree clearly
unnecessary for the commission of the crime, or when in the course of its execution, the offender shall have inflicted
upon any person not responsible for its commission any of the physical injuries covered by subdivisions 3 and 4 of
said Article 263.
5. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its medium period in
other cases.
2
 PUNISHABLE ACTS
1. When by reason or on occasion of the robbery the crime of homicide is
committed
2. When the robbery is accompanied by:
□ Rape
□ Intentional mutilation
□ Arson
3. When by reason or on occasion of such robbery, any of the physical injuries
resulting in:
□ Insanity
□ Imbecility
□ Impotency
□ Blindness 3
 PUNISHABLE ACTS
4. When by reason or on occasion of robbery, any of the physical injuries
resulting in the:
□ Loss of the use of speech
□ Loss of the power to hear or to smell
□ Loss of an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or a leg
□ Loss of the use of any of such member
□ Incapacity for the work in which the injured person is theretofore
habitually engaged is inflicted
5. If the violence or intimidation employed in the commission of the robbery is
carried to a degree clearly unnecessary for the commission of the crime.

4
 PUNISHABLE ACTS
6. When in the course of its execution, the offender shall have inflicted upon
any person not responsible for the commission of the robbery any of the
physical injuries in consequence of which the person injured:
□ Becomes deformed
□ Loses any other member of his body
□ Loses the use thereof
□ Becomes ill or incapacitated for the performance of the work in which
he is habitually engaged for more than 90 days
□ Becomes ill or incapacitated for labor for more than 30 days
7. If the violence employed by the offender does not cause any of the serious
physical injuries defined in Art.263, or if the offender employs intimidation
only.
5
 SPECIAL COMPLEX
CRIME
One which in substance is made up of more than one crime but
which in the eyes of the law is only a single indivisible offense. This
is also known as a composite crime
Article 48 does not apply.

6
ROBBERY WITH
HOMICIDE

7
 “
MEANING OF “HOMICIDE”
The term homicide here is used in the generic sense;
it embraces all forms of killing such as parricide and
murder.

8
 “
Is there a crime such as Robbery with
No.
Murder?
Is there a crime such as Robbery with Multiple
Homicide?
No.

▣ Robbery with Homicide does not limit the taking of life to

one single victim as in ordinary Homicide

9
 “
Should there be intent to kill?
No. In robbery with homicide, the law does not require
that the homicide be committed with intent to kill, the
crime exists even though there is no intention to commit
homicide.

10
 “
The intent must be to commit robbery.

Killing first the victim and then afterwards taking

the money considered robbery with homicide.
But, the offender must have the intent to take
personal property before the killing.

11
 ELEMENTS
▣ The taking of personal property with violence or intimidation against
persons
▣ The property taken belongs to another
▣ The taking was done with animo lucrandi
▣ On the occasion of the robbery or by reason thereof, homicide was
committed.

12
NOTE:
▣ As long as the homicide resulted, during, or because of the
robbery, even if the killing is by mere accident, robbery with
homicide is committed.
▣ All who participated in the robbery as principals are principals in
robbery with homicide, unless it clearly appears that they
endeavored to prevent the same
▣ The crime is still robbery with homicide, even if the person killed
was NOT the person who was robbed

13
NOTE:
▣ In robbery with homicide, the band or uninhabited place is only a
generic aggravating circumstance. It will not qualify the crime to
a higher degree of penalty.
▣ Attempted homicide or attempted murder committed during or on
the occasion of the robbery is absorbed in the crime of Robbery
with Homicide.
▣ Robbery with violence or intimidation upon persons is a separate
crime from robbery with force upon things.

14
THERE IS NO ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE
WHEN:

▣ The intention of the perpetrators is really to kill the victim and

robbery came only as an afterthought. The perpetrators are
liable for two separate crimes of robbery and homicide or
murder, as the case may be.
▣ Homicide is not proven. The crime is only robbery
▣ Robbery is not proven. The crime is only homicide.

15
 Article 294 distinguished from Highway
Robbery

▣ The objective of PD 532 is to deter and punish lawless elements

who commit acts of depredation upon persons and properties of
innocent and defenseless inhabitants who travel from one place to
another, thereby disturbing the peace and tranquility of the nation
and stunting the economic and social progress of the people.
▣ If, however, the robbery was aimed at a specific target, Article 294
of the Revised Penal Code takes control.
▣ Also, conviction for highway robbery requires proof that several
accused were organized for the purpose of committing it
indiscriminately.
16
CASES
17
 PEOPLE vs. MANGULABNAN
RATIO:
In order to determine the existence of the crime of robbery
with homicide, it is enough that a homicide would result by reason
or on the occasion of the robbery and it is immaterial that the
death would supervene by mere accident.

18
 PEOPLE vs. CALIXTO
HELD:
The Supreme Court ruled that the appellants committed
robbery in band with homicide despite the fact that Cuevas was
one of them and not a robbery victim, an innocent bystander or a
stranger.

19
 PEOPLE vs. TAPALES
RATIO:
When Rape and Homicide co-exist in the commission of
Robbery, it is paragraph 1 of Article 294 which applies, the Rape
to be considered as an aggravating circumstance. Rape committed
on the occasion of Robbery with Homicide increases the moral evil of the
crime.

20
 PEOPLE vs. QUINONES
RATIO:
There is no crime of robbery with multiple homicide under the
Revised Penal Code thus the charge should have been for robbery with
homicide only regardless of the fact that three persons were killed in the
commission of the robbery. In this special complex crime, the number of
persons killed is immaterial and does not increase the penalty prescribed
in Article 294 of the said Code.
All the homicides or murders are merged in the composite,
integrated whole that is robbery with homicide so long as the killings were
perpetrated by reason or on the occasion
21
of the robbery.
 PEOPLE vs. SALVILLA
HELD:
Appellant and his co-accused were guilty of the complex
crime of "Robbery with Serious Physical Injuries and Serious
Illegal Detention” for in this case, the crime of Serious Illegal
Detention was such a "necessary means" as it was selected by
Appellant and his co-accused to facilitate and carry out more
effectively their evil design to stage a robbery.

22
ROBBERY WITH RAPE

23
 “
The law does not distinguish whether rape
was committed before, during or after the
robbery. It is enough that the robbery
accompanied the rape.

24
 “
As in robbery with homicide, the offender
must have the intent to take the personal
property belonging to another with intent to
gain and such intent must precede rape.

25
ROBBERY AND RAPE SHOULD BE
CONSUMMATED
▣ Article 294 does not cover robbery with attempted rape.
▣ The crime cannot be a complex crime of robbery with
attempted rape under Art 48, because a robbery cannot be a
necessary means to commit attempted rape; nor attempted
rape, to commit robbery.
▣ If during the robbery, attempted rape were committed, the
crimes would be separate, that is, one for robbery and one for
the attempted rape.
26
 “
What if the taking was done after the failure to
consummate the rape?
There would be two distinct crime of attempted rape and
theft for the original intent was to rape the victim and the
taking was another independent act.
What if the taking was done after the rape, without
intent to gain but just to have some tokens of her
supposed consent?
The offender will be guilty of 2 distinct crimes of rape and
unjust vexation

27
 “
The rape committed on the occasion of the robbery
is not considered a private crime because the crime
is robbery, which is a crime against property.
So, even though the robber may have married the
woman raped, the crime remains robbery with rape.
The rape is not erased.

28
NOTE:
▣ Multiple rapes committed on the same occasion of robbery will
not increase the penalty of the crime of robbery with rape.
▣ When homicide and rape co-exist in the commission of
robbery, rape should be considered as an aggravating
circumstance only to the crime of robbery with homicide.

29
CASES
30
 PEOPLE vs. PATOLA
FACTS:
The appellant was charged and convicted by the RTC of
the crime of robbery with rape. The court imposed the penalty of
death applying Art. 335 instead of Art. 294(2). It regarded article
294[2] as having been "amended" by article 335.
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified
the penalty applying Art. 294(2) citing People vs. Cabural where it
was held that robbery with qualified rape should be punished
under Article 294(2).
31
 PEOPLE vs. DINOLA
HELD:
If the intention of the accused was to commit robbery but
rape was also committed even before the robbery, the crime of
robbery with rape is committed.
However, if the original design was to commit rape but the
accused after committing rape, also committed robbery because
the opportunity presented itself, the criminal acts should be
viewed as two distinct offenses.

32
 PEOPLE vs. BALACANAO
HELD:
Incorrect identification during the preliminary investigation
of her sexual abusers is inconsequential with respect to the
criminal liability of accused-appellants. As conspiracy was proven
and rape was committed as a consequence, or on the occasion of
the robbery, all the conspirators-participants are liable as
principals of the crime of robbery with rape.

33
 PEOPLE vs. REGALA
HELD:
The additional rape committed by herein accused-appellant should not
be considered as aggravating.
It is true that the additional rapes (or killings in the case of multiple
homicide on the occasion of the robbery) would result in an "anomalous
situation" where from the standpoint of the gravity of the offense, robbery with
one rape would be on the same level as robbery with multiple rapes. However,
the remedy lies with the legislature. A penal law is liberally construed in favor
of the offender and no person should be brought within its terms if he is not
clearly made so by the statute. 34
ROBBERY WITH
ARSON

35
 “
The composite crime would only be committed if the
primordial intent of the offender is to commit
robbery and there is no killing, rape, or intentional
mutilation committed by the offender during the
robbery. Otherwise, the crime would be robbery
with homicide, or robbery with rape, or robbery with
intentional mutilation, in that order and the arson
would only be an aggravating circumstance.

36
 “
Arson has been made a component only of robbery
with violence against or intimidation of persons but
not of robbery by the use of force upon things.
Hence, if the robbery was by the use of force upon
things and therewith arson was committed, two
distinct crimes are committed.

37
ROBBERY WITH SERIOUS PHYSICAL
INJURIES (par. 2&3)
▣ To be considered as such, the physical injuries must always be
serious. If the physical injuries are only less serious or slight,
they are absorbed in the robbery. The crime becomes merely
robbery.
▣ The serious physical injuries must be under subdivision 1 or 2
of Article 263.
▣ Thus, Article 294 par. 5 is known as simple robbery.

38
ROBBERY WITH UNNECESSARY VIOLENCE
AND INTIMIDATION (par. 4)
▣ The violence here need not result in serious physical injuries
but the violence employed must be unnecessary to the
commission of robbery.
▣ In the second case, the following requisites must attend:
□ That physical injuries under par. 3 or 4 of Art. 263 was
inflicted in the course of the robbery;
□ That such injuries was inflicted on any person not
responsible for the commission of the robbery.
39
SIMPLE ROBBERY (par. 5)
▣ Known as simple robbery.
▣ Any kind of robbery with less serious physical injuries or slight
physical injuries fall under this specie of robbery.
▣ But where there is no violence exerted to accomplish the
snatching, the crime committed is not robbery but simple theft.
▣ There is sufficient intimidation where the acts of the offender
inspired fear upon the victim although the accused was not
armed.

40
SIMPLE ROBBERY (par. 5)
▣ Illustrations:
□ Snatching money from the hands of the victim and pushing
her as a result of which her skirt was torn and she fell on
the ground;
□ Grabbing a pawnshop ticket and intimidating the victim with
a revolver.

41
THREATS TO EXTORT MONEY vs. ROBBERY THROUGH
INTIMIDATION
▣ Intimidation is not immediate ▣ Intimidation is actual and
▣ Intimidation may be through immediate
intermediary ▣ Intimidation is personal
▣ May refer to the person, honor ▣ Directed only to the person of
or property of the offended the victim
party ▣ Gain is immediate
▣ Gain is not immediate

42
ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE vs. GRAVE COERCION

▣ Although both crimes are attended by violence, in robbery

there is intent to gain but in grave coercion there is not.

43
 ROBBERY vs. BRIBERY
▣ Victim is deprived of money or ▣ Victim parts with his money
property by force or voluntarily.
intimidation. ▣ Victim has committed a crime
▣ Victim did not commit a crime and gives money or gift to
and was intimidated with avoid arrest or prosecution.
arrest or prosecution to
deprive him of personal
property.

44