BP 22 Hour 1 (Vaca vs. CA, et.

al)
The Lawyer's Post / 21 hours ago
One of the most common cases one can find at the
Municial!Metroolitan "rial Courts are BP 22 (Bouncin#
Chec$s) cases. Hence, %e are dedicatin# one ost a da& at
'()) in the evenin# to this t&e of cases, randoml& selected,
for the information of our readers. "his is the first
instalment of such case.
The elements of the offense penalized under B.P. Blg. 22 are:
(1) making, drawing, and issuane of an! hek to appl! to
aount or for "alue# (2) knowledge of the maker, drawer, or
issuer that at the time of issue he does not ha"e suffiient
funds in or redit with the drawee $ank for the pa!ment of the
hek in full upon its presentment# and (%) su$se&uent
dishonor of the hek $! the drawee $ank for insuffiien! of
funds or redit, or dishonor of the hek for the same reason
had not the drawer, without an! "alid ause, ordered the $ank
to stop pa!ment.'
*duardo and +ernando are the vice,resident and resident, resectivel& of a
coman& en#a#ed in the manufacture of refri#eration e-uiment. .A/01 is the
securit& a#enc& the& en#a#ed to rovide them %ith securit& services. On March,
1'22, the& issued a chec$ for P1),))).)) to .A/01 as a&ment for one of its
3illin#s. "he chec$ %as dishonoured %hen resented for a&ment, hence
.A/01 sent them a demand letter. A#ain, *duardo and +ernando issued a
chec$, this time for P1',24).14 to .A/01. "he voucher attached to the chec$
stated that the chec$ issued is relacement for the 3ounced chec$ of P1),))).)).
"he 3alance %as artial a&ment for *rvine5s outstandin# account. A#ain, the
chec$ %hen resented for a&ment 3ounced. .A/01 did not return the first
chec$.
.A/01 filed t%o searate cases for violation of BP 22 a#ainst *duardo and
+ernando. "he first case %as dismissed for the reason that the chec$ %as alread&
aid. "he second case ho%ever, roceeded to trial. "he /e#ional "rial Court
convicted them for violation of BP 22, %hich the Court of Aeals affirmed.
6n their etition 3efore the 1ureme Court, the& raised the follo%in# issues as
#rounds %hich the& 3elieve are sufficient for the 1ureme Court to reverse their
conviction(
1. the rosecution failed to rove their #uilt 3e&ond reasona3le dou3t7
2. the court convicted them 3ased on the %ea$ness of their defense not on the
stren#th of the rosecution7
8. the court should have ac-uitted them 3ased on mista$e of fact and lac$ of
$no%led#e.
"he& also imlored the court to imose the enalt& of fine them, 3ein# first time
offenders %ith #ood social reutation.
"he 1ureme Court affirmed their conviction(
9+irst. "he elements of the offense enali:ed under B.P. Bl#. 22 are( (1) ma$in#,
dra%in#, and issuance of an& chec$ to al& to account or for value7 (2)
$no%led#e of the ma$er, dra%er, or issuer that at the time of issue he does not
have sufficient funds in or credit %ith the dra%ee 3an$ for the a&ment of the
chec$ in full uon its resentment7 and (8) su3se-uent dishonor of the chec$ 3&
the dra%ee 3an$ for insufficienc& of funds or credit, or dishonor of the chec$ for
the same reason had not the dra%er, %ithout an& valid cause, ordered the 3an$ to
sto a&ment. "he ma$er5s $no%led#e is resumed from the dishonor of the
chec$ for insufficienc& of funds. "hus, ;2 of B.P. Bl#. 22 e<ressl& rovides(
1ec. 2. *vidence of $no%led#e of insufficient funds. = "he ma$in#, dra%in# and
issuance of a chec$ a&ment of %hich is refused 3& the dra%ee 3ecause of
insufficient funds in or credit %ith such 3an$, %hen resented %ithin ninet& ('))
da&s from the date of the chec$, shall 3e rima facie evidence of $no%led#e of
such insufficienc& of funds or credit unless such ma$er or dra%er a&s the holder
thereof the amount due thereon, or ma$es arran#ements for a&ment in full 3&
the dra%ee of such chec$ %ithin five (>) 3an$in# da&s after receivin# notice that
such chec$ has not 3een aid 3& the dra%ee.
6n this case, after 3ein# notified on March 2', 1'22 of the dishonor of their
revious chec$, etitioners #ave .A/01 a chec$ for P1',24).14. "he& claim that
this chec$ had 3een intended 3& them to relace the 3ad chec$ the& had
reviousl& issued to the .A/01. Based on the testimon& of a .A/01
accountant, ho%ever, the Court of Aeals found that the chec$ %as actuall&
a&ment for t%o 3ills, one for the eriod of ?anuar& 14 to ?anuar& 81, 1'22 in the
amount of P','8).)2 and another one for the eriod of March 14 to March 81,
1'22 in the same amount. But even if such chec$ %as intended to relace the 3ad
one, its issuance on Aril 18, 1'22 = 1> da&s after etitioners had 3een notified
on March 2', 1'22 of the dishonor of their revious chec$ = cannot ne#ate the
resumtion that etitioners $ne% of the insufficienc& of funds to cover the
amount of their revious chec$. 1ec. 2 of B.P. Bl#. 22 re-uires that such chec$ 3e
#iven %ithin five (>) da&s from the notice of dishonor to them.@
< < <
"he 1ureme Court favoura3l& #ranted their re-uest that the enalt& 3e
imosed uon them 3e fine, e-uivalent to dou3le the amount of the chec$
involved, instead of imrisonment(
9B.P. Bl#. 22, ;1, ar. 1 rovides a enalt& of 9imrisonment of not less than
thirt& da&s 3ut not more than one (1) &ear or 3& a fine of not less than, 3ut not
more than dou3le, the amount of the chec$ %hich fine shall in no case esceed t%o
hundred thousand esos, or 3oth such fine and imrisonment at the discretion of
the Court.@ Petitioners are first,time offenders. "he& are +iliino entrereneurs
%ho resuma3l& contri3ute to the national econom&. Aarentl&, the& 3rou#ht
this aeal, 3elievin# in all #ood faith, althou#h mista$enl&, that the& had not
committed a violation of B.P. Bl#. 22. Other%ise, the& could siml& have acceted
the Aud#ment of the trial court and alied for ro3ation to evade a rison term.
6t %ould 3est serve the ends of criminal Austice if in fi<in# the enalt& %ithin the
ran#e of discretion allo%ed 3& ;1, ar. 1, the same hilosoh& underl&in# the
6ndeterminate 1entence Ba% is o3served, namel&, that of redeemin# valua3le
human material and reventin# unnecessar& derivation of ersonal li3ert& and
economic usefulness %ith due re#ard to the rotection of the social order. 6n this
case %e 3elieve that a fine in an amount e-ual to dou3le the amount of the chec$
involved is an aroriate enalt& to imose on each of the etitioners.@
../. Co. 181D1E Covem3er 14, 1''2, *0FA/0O /. VACA and +*/CAC0O
C6*"O, etitioners, vs. COF/" O+ APP*AB1 and the P*OPB* O+ "H*
PH6B6PP6C*1, resondents.