MANILA — The Supreme Court has affirmed the conviction of a man for psychological violence under Republic Act No. 9262 after finding that his infidelity caused mental and emotional anguish to his wife, sentencing him to four to eight years in prison.

In a 17-page ruling written by Associate Justice Amy Lazaro-Javier, the Second Division sustained the conviction and ruled that marital infidelity may constitute psychological violence under the law.

The case stemmed from a complaint filed by the wife, who alleged that her husband left their home to live with his mistress, with whom he later had two children. The couple married in 2005 and had a son in 2008.

While the wife was pregnant, she noticed changes in her husband’s behavior, including coming home late at night. She later discovered a message on his phone from another woman stating, “AYAW KO NG MAGING KABIT” (I don’t want to be a mistress). When confronted, the husband dismissed it as a prank before eventually leaving their home and later living with his mistress.

The wife later found that he was publicly living with another woman and their children, including posts on social media. She said this caused her mental and emotional suffering and led to a diagnosis of dysthymia by a psychiatrist.

She subsequently filed a complaint for psychological violence under Section 5(i) of Republic Act No. 9262, or the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004.

The Regional Trial Court initially acquitted the husband, citing reasonable doubt and noting that the complaint was filed years after the separation and that he had provided financial support. It also ruled that the alleged infidelity occurred after a de facto separation.

However, the Court of Appeals reversed the ruling and convicted the husband, prompting him to elevate the case to the Supreme Court, arguing that the reversal violated his right against double jeopardy.

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, ruling that double jeopardy does not apply when a judgment is void due to grave abuse of discretion. It said the trial court acted with grave abuse of discretion when it ruled that marital infidelity after a de facto separation is not covered by the law.

The Court stressed that a de facto separation does not dissolve marriage bonds and that any extramarital relationship still constitutes marital infidelity.

It also held that infidelity is recognized as a form of psychological violence under the law, and that intent to cause emotional suffering is presumed from the act itself.

The decision further cited the wife’s psychiatric evaluation, which showed symptoms including sleep disturbances, hopelessness, social withdrawal, and depression.

“At any rate, the law does not require proof that the victim became psychologically ill due to the psychological violence done by her abuser. The law only requires emotional anguish and mental suffering to be proven. To establish emotional anguish or mental suffering, jurisprudence only requires that the testimony of the victim be presented in court since such experiences are personal to this party,” the Supreme Court said.

“To be sure, whatever XXX’s intention was when he chose another woman over his wife is immaterial. For his leaving their conjugal home and building a family with his mistress are acts that were done by him consciously and deliberately. He could not feign innocence by hiding behind good intentions-may they be excuses that he remained civil with AAA or he constantly supported his legitimate son, BBB. The incontrovertible fact remains: he was unfaithful to his wife, and this caused her irreparable mental and emotional hurt.” it added.

Aside from imprisonment, the husband was also ordered to pay a fine of P100,000.