154 SCRA 161 – Criminal Law – Special Penal Laws – Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 – Checks issued as guarantee
In 1986, Victor Que was convicted of violating Batas Pambansa Blg. 22. He appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. In his defense, he argued that he issued the check (which bounced) merely as a guarantee or a security for certain purchases which his company made.
ISSUE: Whether or not Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 applies if the drawer issued the check only as a guarantee.
HELD: Yes, it applies. The law does not make any distinction hence the courts must not make any distinction. Batas Pambansa Bilang 22 applies even in cases where dishonored checks are issued merely in the form of a deposit or a guarantee. Furthermore, the history of the enactment of Batas Pambansa Bilang 22 evinces the definite legislative intent to make the prohibition all-embracing, without making any exception from the operation thereof in favor of a guarantee. The law was in fact introduced to discourage the issuance of bouncing checks, to prevent checks from becoming “”useless scraps of paper”” and to restore respectability to checks, all without distinction as to the purpose of the issuance of the checks. Thus, what are important are the facts that the accused had deliberately issued the checks in question to cover accounts and that the checks were dishonored upon presentment regardless of whether or not the accused merely issued the checks as a guarantee.
