The utterance “Babarilin kita” (I will shoot you) is one of the most commonly prosecuted forms of grave threat in Philippine criminal courts. Under settled jurisprudence and doctrinal interpretation of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), the statement is presumptively a grave threat punishable under Article 282, paragraph 2 of the RPC, unless the context clearly shows that it was uttered as obvious jest, hyperbole, or in circumstances where no reasonable person would feel genuine fear.
Legal Classification: Grave Threat (Article 282, RPC)
Article 282 of the Revised Penal Code provides:
“Any person who shall threaten another with the infliction upon the person, honor or property of the latter or of his family of any wrong amounting to a crime…”
The crime of grave threat is committed when:
- The offender threatens another person with the infliction of a wrong;
- Such wrong amounts to a crime;
- The threat is made with the specific intent that it be taken seriously (animus minandi); and
- The threat causes fear, alarm, or disturbance in the mind of the victim.
The threat to shoot a person (“babarilin”) clearly satisfies element No. 2 because shooting a person with intent to kill constitutes the crime of murder or homicide (Articles 248–249, RPC), or at the very least serious physical injuries (Article 263, RPC) or attempted/frustrated homicide/murder. All of these are crimes against persons. Therefore, the wrong threatened is undeniably one “amounting to a crime.”
Supreme Court rulings have consistently held that threats to kill or shoot a person constitute grave threats, not light threats:
- People v. Olarte (G.R. No. L-1247, April 30, 1949)
- People v. Consigna (G.R. No. L-9467, May 31, 1957)
- People v. Villanueva (G.R. No. L-1351, February 28, 1950)
- People v. Bautista (G.R. No. 137933, August 22, 2001)
- People v. Gomez (G.R. No. 223953, July 17, 2019)
In all these cases and dozens more, the Court has ruled that phrases such as “Papapatay kita,” “Barilin kita,” “Babarilin ko kayo,” or substantially similar words are grave threats.
Modes of Commission and Corresponding Penalties
Article 282 contemplates three (3) modalities:
Conditional grave threat with demand for money or other condition (even if lawful), and the offender attains his purpose
→ Penalty: next lower in degree than that prescribed for the crime threatened to be committed (e.g., if murder is threatened → reclusion temporal instead of reclusion perpetua).Conditional grave threat but the offender does not attain his purpose
→ Penalty lower by two degrees (e.g., prisión correccional).Unconditional threat (or conditional but no demand/condition imposed)
→ Arresto mayor in its maximum period to prisión correccional in its minimum period (4 months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months) + fine not exceeding ₱40,000.00 (as adjusted by R.A. 10951).
The vast majority of “Babarilin kita” cases fall under No. 3 (unconditional), hence the penalty is usually prisión correccional in its minimum period (6 months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months) when appreciated with no modifying circumstances.
When “Babarilin Kita” Is NOT Grave Threat
Despite the presumptive classification, the Supreme Court has acquitted accused persons in the following circumstances:
Uttered in jest or obvious banter (e.g., between close friends or barkada, with laughter immediately following) – lack of animus minandi (People v. Raga, G.R. No. 135757, July 9, 2002).
Heat of anger without intent to carry out and the victim knew it was mere angry utterance (People v. Sanico, G.R. No. 208469, August 13, 2014) – the Court sometimes downgrades to unjust vexation (Article 287, RPC).
Conditional threat with lawful condition (e.g., “Babarilin kita kung hindi ka aalis sa lupa ko”) – may be considered light threat under Article 283 if the condition is lawful and the threat is made to protect a right (Lee v. People, G.R. No. 192074, November 18, 2020).
Mere boastful or drunken talk with no accompanying act that would produce real fear.
However, the presence of any of the following circumstances almost always results in conviction:
- Pointing a gun or any weapon while uttering the words
- Previous grudge or enmity
- Uttered in a serious tone and manner
- Victim actually felt fear and took steps to protect himself/herself (e.g., reported to police, sought barangay protection)
- Accused is known to be armed or has a violent reputation
Distinction from Related Crimes
| Crime | Article | Key Distinction from “Babarilin Kita” as Grave Threat |
|---|---|---|
| Light Threats | 283 | Threatened wrong does not constitute a crime (e.g., “I will slap you,” “I will embarrass you”) |
| Other Light Threats | 285 | Threatening another with a weapon but the wrong does not amount to a crime, or threatening in a band, or in writing without condition |
| Alarms and Scandals | 155 | Public and tumultuous utterance causing disturbance, but no specific victim threatened with a crime |
| Unjust Vexation | 287(2) | When the threat is so trivial or clearly not serious |
| Grave Oral Defamation | 358 + 353 | When the primary intent is to injure reputation rather than to instill fear of a crime |
| Grave Coercion | 286 | When there is actual employment of violence or intimidation to compel the victim to do or not do something against his will |
Special Laws That May Apply Concurrently
R.A. 9262 (Anti-VAWC Act) – If uttered against spouse, former spouse, or person with whom the offender has/had sexual or dating relationship, or their child → psychological violence (Section 5(i)).
R.A. 10175 (Cybercrime Prevention Act) – If sent via text message, Facebook Messenger, or any online platform → grave threat + cybercrime (punishable with one degree higher penalty).
R.A. 11313 (Safe Spaces Act) – If uttered in public spaces, workplace, or online and constitutes gender-based sexual harassment via threat.
Prescriptive Period
- Grave threat under Art. 282, par. 2 (prisión correccional) → prescribes in 10 years (Act No. 3326, as amended).
- If committed via information and communication technologies → 15 years (R.A. 10175).
Practical Advice for Complainants and Accused
For complainants: File the complaint immediately with the barangay or directly with the prosecutor. Bring witnesses, screenshots (if online), medical certificate if trauma resulted, and any evidence showing the accused’s capacity to carry out the threat.
For the accused: The most common successful defenses are (1) jest/banter, (2) heat of anger without real intent, (3) provocation by the complainant, or (4) settlement via mediation (grave threat is compoundable; amicable settlement extinguishes criminal liability if executed before arraignment).
Conclusion
Under Philippine criminal law and jurisprudence spanning more than seven decades, the statement “Babarilin kita” is considered grave threat under Article 282 of the Revised Penal Code unless proven to be clearly a joke, mere angry words, or uttered under circumstances that negate criminal intent and alarm. Courts treat threats involving firearms with particular severity because of the country’s high incidence of gun violence. The utterance is therefore not taken lightly and almost invariably results in criminal prosecution and conviction when reported.