(Updated as of September 2025)
The crime of bigamy is committed by any person who shall contract a second or subsequent marriage before the former marriage has been legally dissolved.
Bigamy is punishable under Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code
Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code states:
“ARTICLE 349. Bigamy. — The penalty of prisión mayor shall be imposed upon any person who shall contract a second or subsequent marriage before the former marriage has been legally dissolved, or before the absent spouse has been declared presumptively dead by means of a judgment rendered in the proper proceedings.”
In the case of Marbella-Bobis vs. Bobis (G.R. No. 138509, 31 July 2000), the Supreme Court laid down the elements of bigamy:
(1) the offender has been legally married;
(2) the first marriage has not been legally dissolved, or in case his or her spouse is absent, the absent spouse has not been judicially declared presumptively dead;
(3) he contracts a subsequent marriage; and
(4) the subsequent marriage would have been valid had it not been for the existence of the first.
The first marriage must be valid in order for a bigamy case to prosper.
Bigamy requires that the offender has been legally married. The existence and the validity of the first marriage being an essential element of the crime of bigamy, it is but logical that a conviction for said offense cannot be sustained where there is no first marriage to speak of (Morigo vs. People, G.R. No. 145226, 06 February 2004).
A void ab initio marriage is a valid defense in the prosecution for bigamy even without a judicial declaration of absolute nullity.
In the case of Pulido vs. People (G.R. No. 220149, 27 July 2021), the Supreme Court abandoned its previous pronouncement that judicial declaration of the absolute nullity of a prior void ab initio marriage secured prior to remarriage is required before such marriage can be considered as a valid defense to bigamy. Thus, the prevailing rule is that a void ab initio marriage is a valid defense in the prosecution for bigamy even without a judicial declaration of absolute nullity. Consequently, a judicial declaration of absolute nullity of either the first and second marriages obtained by the accused is considered a valid defense in bigamy.
The subsequent marriage must have all the requisites for validity except for the fact that there is a prior marriage. However, the Supreme Court has held that the nullity of the second marriage is immaterial to the prosecution for the criminal case of bigamy.
For a bigamy case to prosper, the second marriage must be valid were it not for the existence of the first marriage. However, in the case of Tenebro vs. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 150758, 18 February 2004), the Supreme Court strongly held that the crime of bigamy penalizes the mere act of contracting a second or a subsequent marriage during the subsistence of a valid marriage. The Supreme Court ratiocinated that since a marriage contracted during the subsistence of a valid marriage is automatically void, the nullity of this second marriage is not per se an argument for the avoidance of criminal liability for bigamy.
In bigamy, both the first and second spouses can be offended parties and can file the case.
In the case of People vs. Nepomuceno (G.R. No. L-40624, 27 June 1975), the Supreme Court had the occasion to discuss that in the crime of bigamy, both the first and second spouses may be the offended parties depending on the circumstances, as when the second spouse married the accused without being aware of his previous marriage. It is only if the second spouse had knowledge of the previous undissolved marriage of the accused could she be included in the information as a co-accused.
If the second spouse married the accused despite knowledge of the previous marriage, she can be held liable as an accomplice in the crime of bigamy.
A person, whether man or woman, who knowingly consents or agrees to be married to another already bound in lawful wedlock is guilty as an accomplice in the crime of bigamy (Santiago vs. People, G.R. No. 200233, 15 July 2015). Since the second spouse is merely an accomplice, the punishment is one degree lower or prison correctional equivalent to imprisonment with a duration of six months and 1 day to six years.
The prescriptive period for filing a criminal case for bigamy runs from the time that the second marriage was actually discovered.
It must be noted that the prescriptive period for bigamy is fifteen years (15). This 15 year prescriptive period runs from the time that the second marriage was actually discovered and NOT the date of registration of the second marriage as enunciated in Bonbon Vs. People (G.R. No. 272844, 24 February 2025).
Bigamy is punishable by imprisonment.
Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code imposes the penalty of prison mayor for the crime of bigamy. Thus, the accused, if found guilty of bigamy, shall be sentenced to imprisonment within the range of six years and 1 day to twelve years.
A word to the wise. Do not get married if you are still legally married to another. It is hardly doubtful that true love can justify twelve years behind bars.
About Nicolas and De Vega Law Offices
If you are a victim of a crime or need assistance in filing a criminal case, we can help you. Nicolas and de Vega Law Offices is a full-service law firm in the Philippines. You may visit us at the 16th Flr., Suite 1607 AIC Burgundy Empire Tower, ADB Ave., Ortigas Center, 1605 Pasig City, Metro Manila, Philippines. You may also call us at +632 84706126, +632 84706130, +632 84016392 or e-mail us at [email protected]. Visit our website www.ndvlaw.com.
