Short answer. It is a crime. Article 312 of the Revised Penal Code punishes a person who takes possession of real property, or usurps a real right in property belonging to another, by means of violence against or intimidation of persons. The civil ejectment case runs alongside it, not instead of it.
What the law says
Any person who, by means of violence against or intimidation of persons, shall take possession of any real property or shall usurp any real rights in property belonging to another
Revised Penal Code, Article 312 — Usurpation Of Real Property. Read the full provision →
What the law says
in addition to the penalty incurred for the acts of violence executed by him
Revised Penal Code, Article 312 — Usurpation Of Real Property. Read the full provision →
The element that decides most cases
The article does not punish entering land you do not own. It punishes taking possession by means of violence against or intimidation of persons. That phrase is the dividing line, and it is narrower than people expect. A squatter who quietly builds on a vacant lot, a neighbour who extends a fence at night, or a relative who refuses to leave after a lease ends has not, on those facts alone, committed this offence — those are civil problems, addressed by ejectment or by an action to recover possession. But driving the occupants out with threats, arriving with armed men, or manhandling a caretaker converts the same land grab into a crime under this article.
Violence against persons, not against things
The wording is specific: violence against or intimidation of persons. Bulldozing an empty fence, cutting a padlock or demolishing an unoccupied shed is damage to property, which the Code addresses elsewhere, rather than the violence this article contemplates. Intimidation, however, does not require anyone to be touched. A credible threat that makes the lawful possessor give way — a warning of harm, a show of weapons, the presence of men whose purpose is unmistakable — is enough. The article also reaches the usurpation of real rights, not only of the land itself, so forcibly cutting off a right of way or seizing the enjoyment of an easement can fall within it.
The penalty is a fine, and the violence is charged separately
The punishment under this article is a fine of fifty to one hundred per cent of the gain obtained, but not less than fifteen thousand pesos; where the gain cannot be ascertained the fine runs from forty thousand to one hundred thousand pesos. Those amounts are the ones set by Republic Act No. 10951 (2017), which revised fines and property values throughout the Revised Penal Code, so any source quoting the far smaller 1930 figures is out of date. Crucially, the fine is imposed in addition to the penalty incurred for the acts of violence. The imprisonment, if any, comes from the assault, the threat or the injury — charged as its own offence.
What to do if it happens to you
Two tracks usually run at once. On the criminal side, report the incident promptly and preserve what proves force was used: medical certificates, photographs, CCTV, the barangay blotter entry, and the names of witnesses who saw the entry. On the civil side, an ejectment case recovers the land itself, and it has a short filing period counted from the dispossession, so delay is expensive. Note that a criminal conviction does not by itself hand the property back, and winning possession does not by itself punish the violence. No result can be promised in either forum. Get advice early on which to file first, because the choice affects both.