People vs. Grospe
People vs. Grospe
People vs. Grospe
GROSPE (1988)
FACTS:
Manuel Parulan, is an authorized wholesale dealer of San Miguel Corp (SMC). He was charged with BP
22 at the RTC for issuing a dishonored check in 1983 in favor of SMC (for insufficiency of funds) and, in
spite of repeated demands, failed and refused to make good said check to the damage of SMC. He was
also charged with Estafa for issuing another check for payment of the beer he purchased and refused to
redeem said check despite repeated demands
Trial court of Pampanga dismissed the case because it said, that deceit and damage, the elements of the
crimes did not occur in Pampanga, therefore, this court has no jurisdiction. The checks were made in
Guiguinto, Bulacan, and delivered to SMC also in Bulacan. Were deposited in Planters Bank (drawee
bank) at Santa Maria, Bulacan and was received by BPI at San Fernando, Pampanga for clearing
purposes.
Sol Gen points that 2 checks are involved. That Parulan issued PDBs check (Bulacan) and was received
by SMC at Bulacan. Then it was forwarded to SMC San Fernando, Pampanga where it was received by
te Finance Officer and deposited with BPI San Fernando Branch then the SMC depository bank received
a notice of dishonor for "insufficiency of funds" from the drawee bank, the PDB, in Santa Maria,
Bulacan. This check was the subject of Estafa. For Violation of the Bouncing Checks Law, on the other
hand, the elements of deceit and damage are not essential nor required. An essential element of that
offense is knowledge on the part of the maker or drawer of the check of the insufficiency of his funds, it
being mala prohibitum