her damage and prejudice. ACTS CONTRARY TO LAW. Clearly, there is no allegation in the Information that the victim was exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse. The element that the child was exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse increases the penalty from prision correccional to reclusion temporal in its medium period if the victim is under 12 years old. This element distinguishes whether the crime would be punishable under RA 7610 or under the RPC. Thus, there is a need to strictly construe this element. The Court has been consistent in strictly interpreting elements in criminal cases which would increase the penalty against the accused. In People v. Orilla, the Court stated that "when the law or rules specify certain circumstances that can aggravate an offense or qualify an offense to warrant a greater penalty, the information must allege such circumstances and the prosecution must prove the same to justify the imposition of the increased penalty."[7] In this case, however, the Information was silent on whether the victim was exploited in prostitution or was subjected to other sexual abuse, and it was also not proven by the prosecution during the trial of the case. However, the Information is sufficient to charge the accused for acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 of the RPC, in accordance with the variance doctrine under the Rules of Court.[8] While the circumstance of the child as a child exploited in prostitution or subjected to "other sexual abuse" was not alleged or proven, all the elements of Article 336 of the RPC were clearly and accurately alleged in the Information, and thereafter proven during the course of the trial. Accused Quimvel put his hand inside the undergarment of the child while the latter was sleeping, and rubbed her vagina which is an obvious act of lasciviousness or lewdness. I note that the words "force and intimidation" were used in the Information, which is the same wording as the element in acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 of the RPC. Moreover, the victim was only 7 years old when the incident happened. The victim being a child under 12 years old, all the elements of Article 336 of the RPC were sufficiently alleged in the Information and subsequently proven beyond reasonable doubt during the trial of the case. ACCORDINGLY, I vote to GRANT the petition and to CONVICT Eduardo Quimvel y Braga for acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code and to impose on him the penalty of prision correccional in its medium period there being no aggravating or mitigating circumstances.