AMADA RESTERIO VS PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

G.R. No. 177438 | September 24, 2012 | BERSAMIN, J.

FACTS:

Amada Resterio issued a Chinabank check worth P50,000 payable to the order of Bernardo T.
Villadolid. Upon presentment, the check bounced for the reason account closed. A notice of dishonor
was sent to Resterio via registered mail. She failed to pay the amount of the check within five banking
days. Resterio contended that she did not own the check issued and that it was a mere collateral for a
loan not being intended to be deposited. She also denied receiving a notice of dishonor. Villadolid filed a
case against Resterio for violation of B.P. 22. The MTCC found Resterio guilty as charged. Upon appeal,
the RTC affirmed the MTCC decision. Resterio filed a petition for review with the CA which was denied for
lack of merit.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Amada Resterio is liable under B.P. 22

RULING:

The petition is meritorious. The Court reversed the decision of the CA and acquits Amada
Resterio. To be liable under B.P. 22, the Prosecution must prove the essential elements, namely: (1)
making/drawing a check to apply for account or for value; (2) knowledge of the maker/drawer of
insufficient funds with the drawee bank; (3) dishonor of the check by the drawee bank for insufficiency of
funds. Only first and third element are present in this case. To establish the existence of the second
element, the State should present the giving of a written notice of the dishonor to the drawer, maker of the
dishonored check. A notice of dishonor received by the maker/drawer is indispensable before conviction
can ensue. The notice must be in writing. A notice of dishonor is not only proof of the second element of
B.P. 22 but it also affords the offender due process. Resterio denied receiving a notice of dishonor. The
prosecution presented a demand letter together with two registry return receipts, however these are not
sufficient to establish the fact that a written notice of dishonor had been sent to or served to Resterio. The
Court further held that lack of a notice of dishonor is fatal. However, the civil liability of Amada Resterio
was established. Thus, she is ordered to pay Villadolid the face value of the check.