Short answer. Yes. Article 66 of the Revised Penal Code directs courts, when fixing the amount of a fine, to give attention not only to the mitigating and aggravating circumstances but — more particularly — to the wealth or means of the offender. A fine is meant to be felt, so the offender's means matter.
What the law says
in fixing the amount in each case attention shall be given, not only to the mitigating and aggravating circumstances, but more particularly to the wealth or means of the culprit
Revised Penal Code, Article 66 — How Courts Fix Fines. Read the full provision →
The court's discretion within limits
A fine is not always a single fixed figure; often the law sets a range. Article 66 tells the court how to move within it. In imposing fines the courts may fix any amount within the limits established by law. The judge chooses the amount, but the choice is bounded on both ends by whatever floor and ceiling the particular offence carries. The article does not let a court set a fine above the statutory maximum or below its minimum. What it governs is the exercise of judgment inside that lawful window, and it lists the things the court must weigh in making that choice.
Wealth or means is given particular weight
The article makes the offender's financial standing central. In fixing the amount, attention shall be given, not only to the mitigating and aggravating circumstances, but more particularly to the wealth or means of the culprit. The phrase "more particularly" is deliberate: among the factors, the offender's means is singled out as the leading consideration. The logic is that a fine should sting enough to be a real penalty. A sum that is trivial to a rich person but crushing to a poor one would punish unequally, so the court calibrates the figure to the individual's capacity to pay.
The other factors still count
Wealth is emphasised, but it is not the only thing weighed. The court also considers the mitigating and aggravating circumstances present in the case — the same kinds of circumstances that influence penalties generally. A fine may be moved lower where circumstances favour the offender and higher where they aggravate the offence, all while staying within the statutory limits and remaining sensitive to means. So the final figure reflects a blend: the gravity signalled by the circumstances, adjusted to what the particular offender can actually bear.
Why this rule exists
The provision reflects a fairness principle that runs through penal law: punishment should be proportionate not just to the offence but, for fines, to the person paying. Two offenders who commit the same crime may properly be fined different amounts if their means differ sharply, because the point is that each feels a comparable measure of punishment. For someone facing a possible fine, this means the court is entitled to look into financial capacity, and that a genuine claim of limited means is a relevant consideration the law tells the judge to take into account.