Nestor P. Abes:, NPS DOCKET NO. 10-00552 Complainant - Versus - For-, ESTAFA Under RPC Art. Respondent. 315 para 2 (D)

Republic of the Philippines
Department of Justice
NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE
OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR
La Trinidad (2601), Province of Benguet
NESTOR P. ABES, NPS DOCKET NO. 10-00552

Complainant
-versus- -for-
SHERYL DALLY, ESTAFA Under RPC Art.

Respondent. 315 para 2(d)
RES0LUTI0N

Complainant, NESTOR P. ABES is charging Sheryl Dally of the crime of Estafa
under Article 315, par. 2(d) of the Revised Penal Code, to wit:
Art.315 x x x x x x
1. x x x x x
2. By means of any of the following false pretenses or fraudulent acts

excuted prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud:
a. x x x x x x
b. x x x x x x
c. x x x x x x
d. By postdating a check, or issuing a check in payment of an

obligation when the offender had no funds in the bank, or his funds
deposited therein were not sufficient to cover the amount of the check.
e. x x x x x x

Article 315 has three subdivisions classifying the different forms of estafa
according to the means by which the fraud is committed.
Thus, estafa is committed-
a. with unfaithfulness or abuse of conindence,
b. by means of false pretenses or fraudulent acts; or
c. Through fraudulent means.
The three ways of committing estafa under Art. 315 may be reduced to two only.
The first form under subdivision No. 1 is known as estafa with abuse of confidence, and
the second and third forms under subdivision Nos. 2 and 3 cover estafa by means of
deceit.
The elements of estafa by means of deceit are:
a. That there must be false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means.
b. That such false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means must be
made or executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of fraud.
c. That the offended party must have relied on the false pretense, fraudulent
act, or fraudulent means, that is, he was induced to part with his money or
property because of the false pretense, fraudulent act, or fraudulent means.
d. That as a result thereof, the offended party suffered damage.
FACTS OF THE CASE
VERSION OF THE COMPLAINANT:

On April 20, 2020, respondent Sheryl Dally and complainant Nestor
P. Abes met at BDO Branch, Km 4 La Trinidad, Benguet wherein the
respondent manifested that she is interested in buying the car of the
complainant and insisted that she will buy it with the original price in cash
which is Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (Php500, 000. 00) to which the
complainant agreed. On April 22, 2020, respondent issued in favor of the
complainant a BDO cheque amounting to 500,000. Said cheque was for the
payment of the car she bought from the complainant. At the time Sheryl Dally
issued the cheque, she made the assurance and representation that said
cheque were good cheque and that she gave her cellphone number to the
complainant in case problem would arise. That on June 15, 2020,
Complainant deposited the cheque to China bank but it was dishonored. The
complainant tried to reach out to the respondent by texting or calling him but
to no avail. An initial demand was executed through complainants counsel
which was received by the respondent on July 12, 2020. On August 25,2020,
a final demand was sent to respondents postal address however, she
unjustifiably ignored all of the demand for her to pay the 500,000 as payment
of the car she bought from the complainant. For failure to settle her obligation,
complainant filed a case of Estafa under Art. 315 par. 2(d) of the Revised
Penal Code.
VERSION OF THE RESPONDENT:

Sheryl Dally admits that she issued the check as payment for the
car she bought from the complainant however, she averred that she
inadvertently issued the wrong cheque and she is willing to pay the amount
when she returns to La Trinidad. She denies the fact that she unjustifiably
ignored the demand made by the complainant, the truth being that she was
on her way to the province where the signal is very poor. She also claimed
that the demand letter was received by her housemates in her address at
Pico, La Trinidad in her absence and it has come to her knowledge only when
she returned to La Trinidad after the lifting of the lockdown. She said that it
was only in October ,3,2020 that she was able to return to her residence in
La Trinidad due to the restrictions of lockdown and by that time, she also
learned that the complainant has filed a estafa case against her.
ISSUE:
Is the respondent liable for Estafa under article 315, par. 2 (d) of the
revised penal code?
FINDINGS / RECOMMENDATIONS:

The mere fact that the drawer had insufficient or no funds in the
bank to cover the check at the time she postdated or issued a check, is
sufficient to make her liable for estafa. The failure of the drawer of the check
to deposit the amount necessary to cover his cheque within three (3) days
from receipt of notice from the payee or holder that said check has been
dishonored for lack of insufficiency of funds shall prima facie evidence of
deceit constituting false pretense or fraudulent act.
In the case at bar, respondent Sheryl Dally initially befriended

Nestor Abes and was able to convince the complainant to sell his car in the
amount agreed upon. As payment, Dally issued a cheque and made
assurance to Abes that said cheque were good and he has nothing to worry
about it. Clearly, there is misrepresentation and deceit in this case. The
contention of the respondent that she has not received any notice from the
complainant is unavailing because the mere the fact that the respondent
issued a cheque with insufficient funds is sufficient to make her liable for
estafa.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, probable cause exists to

indict respondent SHERYL DALLY for the crime of ESTAFA under Art. 315
paragraph 2 (d) of Revised Penal Code to be filed in the Regional trial Court
of La Trinidad, Benguet.
La Trinidad, Benguet, Philippines, 9th October 2020.
yvestmael
YVETTE A. GALANG
Associate Prosecuting Attorney
La Trinidad, Benguet
MCLE V-0012334
Approved:
eunivars
EUNICE K. VARGAS
Provincial Prosecutor
MCLE IV-12345

Copy Furnished:
SHERYL DALLY-Pico, La Trinidad Benguet

Nestor P. Abes:, NPS DOCKET NO. 10-00552 Complainant - Versus - For-, ESTAFA Under RPC Art. Respondent. 315 para 2 (D)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nestor P. Abes:, NPS DOCKET NO. 10-00552 Complainant - Versus - For-, ESTAFA Under RPC Art. Respondent. 315 para 2 (D)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nestor P. Abes:, NPS DOCKET NO. 10-00552 Complainant - Versus - For-, ESTAFA Under RPC Art. Respondent. 315 para 2 (D)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

NESTOR P. ABES, NPS DOCKET NO. 10-00552

SHERYL DALLY, ESTAFA Under RPC Art.

2. By means of any of the following false pretenses or fraudulent acts

d. By postdating a check, or issuing a check in payment of an

Thus, estafa is committed-

a. with unfaithfulness or abuse of conindence,

b. by means of false pretenses or fraudulent acts; or

c. Through fraudulent means.

The elements of estafa by means of deceit are:

d. That as a result thereof, the offended party suffered damage.

FACTS OF THE CASE

VERSION OF THE COMPLAINANT:

VERSION OF THE RESPONDENT:

In the case at bar, respondent Sheryl Dally initially befriended

WHEREFORE, premises considered, probable cause exists to

La Trinidad, Benguet, Philippines, 9th October 2020.

Associate Prosecuting Attorney

La Trinidad, Benguet

MCLE V-0012334

SHERYL DALLY-Pico, La Trinidad Benguet

You might also like