EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-15079. January 31, 1962.]

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES , plaintiff-appellee, vs. GUILLERMO

I. VENTURA , defendant-appellant.

Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.

Claro M. Recto for defendant-appellant.

SYLLABUS

1. DRUGLESS HEALING; WHEN CONSIDERED ILLEGAL PRACTICE OF

MEDICINE. — Treating human ailments by means of drugless healing without the
required license, constitutes illegal practice of medicine.
2. ID.; POWER OF STATE TO PRESCRIBE QUALIFICATIONS OF
PRACTITIONERS. — It is within the police power of the State to require that persons
who devote themselves to the curing of human ills should possess a thorough
knowledge for the proper diagnosis of diseases of the human body, and their
possession of such knowledge can be ascertained in an examination of the parties by
competent persons.
3. ID.; LICENSE TO PRACTICE DRUGLESS HEALING CANNOT BE IMPLIED. —
The license to practice drugless healing cannot be implied from the mere fact that the
Government had permitted appellant to serve free in sanitarium or that countless
people persisted in engaging his services. These people might have contracted his
services on the mistaken notion that he was duly licensed to practice his profession.
4. ID.; ESTOPPEL; GOVERNMENT IS NOT ESTOPPED BY MISTAKES OF ITS
AGENTS. — Granting without conceding that the Government had encouraged
appellant's practice, the Government is never estopped by mistakes or errors on the
part of its agents.
5. PHYSIOTHERAPY; MASSAGE THROUGH PHYSICAL DEVICES, WHEN
ALLOWED. — The practice of physiotherapy by massage through physical devices is
allowed if prescribed by a duly registered physician or if the application is limited to a
physical or muscular development.

DECISION

BENGZON , C.J : p

Statement — This is an appeal from the decision of the Court of First Instance of
Rizal nding Guillermo I. Ventura guilty of illegal practice of medicine under Section 770
in connection with Section 2678 of the Revised Administrative Code, and sentencing
him, this being his Second offense, to pay a ne in the sum of P500.00, with the
corresponding subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency and to pay costs.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com

 Appellant, the accused, was charged with the above offense in an information
which alleges that in February 1955, he did,
"willfully, unlawfully and feloniously and for compensation and reward, practice
medicine in the said City (Pasay) by treating and applying electrical appliances to
patients for the purpose of curing them with their ailments, diseases, pains, and
physical defects from which they are suffering and by holding out himself to the
public by means of signs, advertisements, and other means, to be a Doctor of
Medicine."

Facts — The lower court found. as facts. the following:

". . . in the year 1949, the accused herein, Guillermo I. Ventura, was convicted by
the court of First Instance of Rizal of a `similar offense' or illegal practice of
medicine in the municipality of Pasay, now Pasay City and sentenced to pay a
ne of P200.00 under the same legal provisions, or Section 770 in connection
with Section 2678 of the Revised Administrative Code.
". . . by reason of certain complaints the National Bureau of Investigation had
received from the President of the Philippine Federation of Private Medical
Practitioners and from the Chairman of the Board of Medical Examiners, the
National Bureau of Investigation on December 16, 1955, sent its morgue
attendant Jose Natayan to the clinics of the accused at No. 2454 M. de la Cruz
Street, Pasay City. Natayan was at that time suffering from pains in his back and
he asked the accused to see his sickness. The accused attended to Natayan;
wrote something on a piece of paper; and then he told him that he (Natayan) `was
sick of lumbago'. Thereupon, the accused asked Natayan to pay P5.00 and then
asked him to pay the amount to a lady employee in the clinic which Natayan did.
At the request of the accused, Natayan, then went around the other side of the
clinic where he was given an enema of hot water by a male attendant. Then
Natayan was asked to lie down on a table where his back was exposed to a big
bulb for around fteen minutes and afterwards to a red colored bulb for another
ten minutes. Thereafter Natayan went back to the accused, who told him to come
back to his clinic for six consecutive days. After that Natayan went back on the
same day or December 16, 1955 to his o ce in the National Bureau of
Investigation.

The following day, Natayan returned to the clinic of the accused with the National
Bureau of Investigation raiding party composed of two agents, two attorneys and
one photographer. After he was dropped by the National bureau of Investigation
agents about seven meters away from the clinic of the accused, Natayan
proceeded to the o ce of the accused, who then and there told him that another
treatment would be applied to him and that he would pay P3.00. After paying this
amount and while Natayan was lying on a table about to be given treatment the
National Bureau of Investigation agents raided the place.

The accused herein, Guillermo I. Ventura, is not a duly registered masseur or a

physician qualified to practice medicine."

Issues. — Appellant seeks a reversal here of aforementioned judgment of

conviction on the grounds: (1) that the offense charged in the information had already
prescribed; (2) that the laws involved are unconstitutional and void; (3) that granting
that the said laws are valid the accused should not have been prosecuted thereunder
because he was not engaged in the practice of medicine (4) that Congress, in passing
House Bills Nos. 2405 and 357 recognized and believed in the e cacy of the drugless
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 systems of healing and although said bills were vetoed by the President of the
Philippines and thereby did not become regular statutes, they may be considered as
concurrent resolutions formally establishing the drugless system of healing as a
separate and distinct profession, not covered by Section 770 of the Medical Law; (5)
that the complainants and the Government are estopped from prosecuting the accused
under Section 770 because they were the ones who induced him to practice drugless
healing after his conviction in 1949; and (6) that the accused has an implied license to
practice drugless healing from the people of the Philippines and the Chairman of the
Medical Board of Examiners.
Discussions. — Appellant, testifying on his behalf admitted that for the past 35
years, he had been practicing as a naturopathic physician, "treating human ailments
without the use of drugs and medicines" and employing in his practice "electricity, water
and hand", without a license to practice medicine; that during this time he had treated
500,000 patients, more or less, about 90% of whom were healed, and that he had
studied drugless healing in the American University, Chicago, Illinois for about four
years.
Invoking prescription, he argues that in view of the fact that he had begun the
alleged practice of medicine thirty- ve years ago without the required license, the crime
charged in the information had already prescribed. 1
The records reveal that the accused begun practicing his method of drugless
healing 35 years ago. This practice was rst discovered by the authorities in 1949. He
was prosecuted and convicted therefore the same year. Sometime after he again set up
a clinic. He had a lucrative clientele and nobody bothered him.
However, at about February, 1955, the President of the Philippine Federation of
Private Medical Practitioners, complained to the National Bureau of Investigation that
appellant was advertising himself as capable of treating human ailments without drugs.
Upon investigation, appellant was found to be without certi cate of registration to
practice such profession either from the Board of Medical Examiners or from the
Committee of Examiners of Masseurs. So, this prosecution started in 1956. It is clear
that the four-year period of prescription of the offense charged should be computed
from February, 1955 when the National Bureau of Investigation discovered appellant's
alleged illegal practice of Medicine.
Appellant also questions the constitutionality of Section 770 in relation to
Section 775 of the Revised Administrative Code. It is appellant's theory that to require,
of any person whose business is merely to stimulate by mechanical means the nerves
of the body, many years of study in medical schools, taking up obstetrics, general
surgery, gynecology, bacteriology and many other sciences, is curtailment of the
exercise of one's calling, a violation of the constitutional principle that all men have the
right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and are entitled to the equal protection
of the law. It is furthermore theorized that inasmuch as drugless healing is not taught in
any of the medical schools prescribed, how could the members of the Medical Board of
Examiners pass on the competence of these drugless healers?
This same contention was presented to and settled by this Court in the case of
People vs. Buenviaje who was convicted of illegal practice of medicine for practicing
chiropractor. 2 It held:
"There is very little force in this argument. The subjects in which an examination
is required relate to matters of which a thorough knowledge seems necessary for
the proper diagnosis of diseases of the human body and it is within the police
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 power of the State to require that persons who devote themselves to the curing of
human ills should possess such knowledge."

In the instant case, we must again uphold those immutable concepts of the
police power of the State. Under this power, the State may prescribe such regulations
as in its judgment will secure or tend to secure the general welfare of the people, to
protect them against the consequences of ignorance and incapacity as well as of
deception and fraud. As one means to this end, it has been the practice of different
States, from time immemorial to exact in any pursuit, profession or trade. a certain
degree of skill and learning upon which the community may con dently rely, their
possession being generally ascertained in an examination of parties by competent
persons, or inferred from a certi cate to them in the form of a diploma or license from
an institution established for instruction on the subjects, scienti c and otherwise, with
which such pursuits have to deal. 3
Appellant claims that his act of stimulating the affected nerves of the patients
without use of any drug or medicine is not practice of medicine; that "practice of
medicine" is con ned only to the systems taught by the medical schools, namely, the
regular, the homeopathic and the electric schools or systems.
Section 770 of the Revised Administrative Code in no uncertain terms covers
appellant's acts. The statutory de nition as to what acts constitute illegal practice of
medicine as provided in said Section 770 includes the acts and practices performed by
appellant. By his own statements, he admitted to have continuously diagnosed and
treated more or less 500,000 instances of different kinds of human ailments and to
have prescribed remedies therefor.
As regards the contention that there are at least two concurrent resolutions
declaring formally that Congress has recognized the drugless methods of healing, we
need not elaborate further than to say that not until such recognition is actually
embodied in a statute, shall we extend consideration of such method.
Appellant pleads that the lower court erred in not holding that the complainants
and the government are estopped from prosecuting him because they were the ones
who induced him to practice drugless healing after his conviction in 1949. He tried to
show that medical practitioners, members of Congress, provincial governors, city
mayors and municipal board members wrote to him requesting his help for persons
suffering from all kinds of ailments; that municipal ordinances and resolutions were
also passed authorizing him not only to practice his method of healing but also to put
up clinics in some municipalities; that he was even extended free transportation
facilities to work in the Central Luzon Sanitarium in Tala, Caloocan, Rizal.
Above plea cannot be sustained by this Court. The doctrine of estoppel does not
apply to the government. 4 It is never estopped by mistakes or errors on the part of its
agents, even assuming without conceding that said municipalities had encouraged
appellant's practice. We cannot allow the bargaining away of public health and safety
for the semblance of bene t to a few government o cials, people or even
municipalities.
Similarly, there is no such thing as implied license to practice drugless healing by
the mere fact that the Chairman of the Board of Medical Examiners had permitted
appellant to serve free in the Central Luzon Sanitarium in Tala, Caloocan, Rizal, or that
countless people persisted in engaging his services. For one thing, these people might
have contracted his services on the mistaken notion that he was duly licensed to
practice his profession; for another, a repetition of illegal acts can never make them
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 legal.
As additional argument, appellant urges acquittal under the new Medical Act of
1959 wherein the practice of physiotherapy is recognized as a distinct science. He
5
claims coverage of said law on the ground that he practices physiotherapy by massage
through physical devices and upon the recommendation of duly registered physicians.
The above argument has no merit because there is strong evidence to the effect
that appellant alone diagnoses his patients' ailments and applies that remedies
therefor 6 without written order or prescription by a registered physician.
Judgment — Wherefore, the decision appealed from is hereby a rmed in all
parts and respects. Costs against appellant.
Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Paredes, Dizon and
De Leon, JJ., concur.
Padilla, J.,took no part.

Footnotes

1. SEC. 1 (Act 3673). — Violations penalized by special acts shall unless otherwise provided
in such Acts, prescribe in accordance with the following rules:
(b) after four years for those punished by imprisonment for more than one month
but less than two years.
2. 47 Phil. 536.

3. U.S. vs. Gomez Jesus, 31 Phil. 225-233.

4. Republic vs. Go Bon Lee, 11499, April 29, 1961; Koppel (Phil.) Inc. vs. Collector of Internal
Revenue, L-10550, Sept. 19, 1961.

5. Republic Act No. 2383, Sec. 11. Exemptions. — The Preceding section shall not be
construed to affect (a) any medical student duly enrolled in any approved medical
college or school under training, serving without any professional fee in any government
or private hospital, provided that he renders such service under the direct supervision and
control of a registered physician; (b) any legally registered dentist engaged exclusively in
the practice of dentistry; (c) any duly registered masseur or physiotherapist, provided
that he applies massage or other physical means upon written order or prescription of a
duly registered physician or provided that such application of massage or physical
means shall be limited to physical or muscular development.

6. See exhibit "A".

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com