Rigor vs.

People

G.R. No. 144887 | Nov 17 2014 | Azcuna, J.

Petitioners: Alfredo Rigor
Respondents: People of the Philippines
Rules of Court Rule 110 Sec 15

DOCTRINE
o

TC San Juan may try the case despite it being issued at Rural Bank
San Juan, deposited at PSBank San Juan, but dishonored at Assoc
Bank Tarlac.

FACTS
o

o
o

Nov 16 1989
o Alfredo Rigor applied for a P500k commercial loan from
Rural Bank (RB) San Juan on Nov 16 1989. Rigor signed a
Promissory Note (PN) stating a 24% interest per year. The
loan was approved by RB San Juan Manager de Guzman
and Controller Agapito Uy. A cashiers check with P487k net
proceeds of loan was issued to Rigor. Rigor endorsed and
encashed the check with the RB San Juan teller Cruz who
stamped the word Paid. Rigor issued an undated
Associated Bank (AB) Tarlac Branch check in the amount of
P500k payable to RB San Juan. The application, approval
and receipt of proceeds were all in one day because Rigor is
the kumpare of RB San Juan President and he is well-known
to directors because they all come from Tarlac.
Rigor failed to pay the loan upon maturity of the loan on Dec 16 1989.
Rigor personally asked a 2 month extension but still failed to pay so
asked for another 2 month extension. Rigor failed to pay and asked
for a 30 day extension on Apr 16 1990 but was now denied by de
Guzman.
de Guzman sent a formal demand letter on Apr 25 1990.
RB San Juan deposited the AB check with PSBank (PSB) San Juan
on May 25 1990, but was returned because the account was closed.
AB Tarlac Employee Pasion declared the account was closed and
had at most P40k. Hence, the check was dishonored in Tarlac
despite it being deposited in PSB San Juan and was formerly issued
with RB San Juan.

Rigor denied the charges and claimed

o Uy and Uys sister Agnes Angeles proposed to Rigor to
secure a P500k loan from RB San Juan
o P200k in Rigors name and P300k in Uys name where
Angeles is to pay the unpaid loans of borrowers in their side
banking activities
o Uy told Rigor he can put up his 4-door Mercedes Benz as
collateral for the P200k loan for it to be approved and the
P300k will have no collateral
o Rigor agreed and signed a bank loan application form, PN
and chattel mortgage for his Benz
o Uy gave Rigor 2 premiere bank checks for P100k each
o Rigor issued an undated personal check for P500k
o Check was deposited later in May but the check bounced
o Rigor told Uy to get the Benz as payment of the P200k loan
o Uy refused and said he wanted to be paid the whole amount
of P500k
Trial Court of Pasig found Rigor guilty of violation of Sec 1 BP 22 on
Jul 8 1994. Rigor was sentenced to an imprisonment of 6 months
and to pay P500k to RB San Juan. Rigor contends the Trial Court of
Pasig had no jurisdiction over the case since there was no proof
offered that his check was issued, delivered, dishonored or that
knowledge of insufficiency of the funds occurred in San Juan, Manila.

ISSUE
o

W/N the Trial Court of Pasig had jurisdiction to try and decide case
for violation of BP 22. YES

Page 1 of 2

RULING & RATIO

o
o

o
o

o
o
o

Rule a person charged with a transitory crime may be validly tried

in any municipality or territory where the offense was in part
committed
Violations of BP 22 are categorized as transitory or continuing crimes
because some acts material and essential to the crimes and
requisite to their consummation occur in one municipality or territory
and some in another.
st
Either court has jurisdiction to try cases given that the 1 court taking
the case excludes other courts.
Evidence showed the undated check was i
o issued and delivered at RBSJ San Juan on Nov 16 1989
o subsequently dated Feb 16 1990 also at San Juan
o deposited on May 25 1990 with PSBank San Juan but
dishonored by Associated Bank
San Juan is place of drawing and issuing whereas Tarlac was the
place where it was dishonred
Thus, the CA correctly ruled that a suit on the check can be filed in
any of the places where any of the elements of offense occurred:
Drawn, Issued, Delivered or Dishonored
Hence, the offense is triable by the Trial Court of Pasig

DISPOSITION
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED and the assailed Decision of the Court
of Appeals, in CA-G.R. CR No. 18855, is hereby AFFIRMED. Costs against
petitioner.

Page 2 of 2