Resolution for BP22

Good day!

I would like to request for assistance in explaining the contents of a resolution a friend of mine received for an estafa case filed against him.

He acquired a loan from some people (who are "partners"), who asked him to guarantee his payment with some post dated checks. He was unable to follow through with the deposits and the said current account eventually closed, hence, resulting in 2 bouncing checks.

Now, the people he owed money to filed two separate estafa cases against him, with one check amounting to Php 65,000, and the other one amounting to around Php 200,000.

He was unable to file a counter-affidavit during the course of the case, but he managed to show up for all the court proceedings.

Recently, he received a resolution in the mail (for the first check) stating that "the complainant has not established in his complaint that the check was postdated or issued in payment of an obligation contracted at the time of the issuance and delivery of the check". It further states that "The meaning given to the phrase, 'in payment of an obligation' is that the check should not be postdated or issued in payment of pre-existing obligation."

It also states that "the complainant failed to offer documentary proofs or receipts showing that the respondent issued the subject check simultaneously that the respondent allegedly contracted his obligation." and that "the complainant failed to establish the element of fraud on the part of the respondent in issuing the check".

The end of the document states that "it is respectfully recommended that an information be filed against the respondent for Violation of BP Blg 22... however, it is respectfully recommended that the charge against the respondent for the crime of Estafa be dismissed due to insufficiency of evidence... Bail recommended: as stated in the information."

My questions are as follows:
1. Does this document mean that the court's FINAL decision is to dismiss the case already and that he has nothing to worry about anymore regarding the Php65000 check?

2. If so, why does it state that bail is recommended? What does the statement "it is respectfully recommended that an information be filed against the respondent for Violation of BP Blg 22" mean?

2. Is there a chance that the complainant would request that the case be reopened and that new evidence be presented?

3. He says that there were two checks. The one mentioned in this document is just one of them. He is expecting another similar document pertaining to the second check soon. Is there a chance that the resolution for the second check will be different, that it will not be "dismissed"?

4. What can he do in case that happens, if the resolution for the second case happens to be against him?

Thank you so much for going through my lengthy message. I really appreciate whatever advice you can offer.

it is not a decision of the court, but a resolution of the prosecutor. he is being charged of the criminal offense of violation of bp 22. it is the separate charge of estafa w/c was dismissed.

he can file motion for reconsideration within 10 days from receipt.

normally it will be one count for each check. normally one resolution with several counts, but it may be that there will be another separate resolution.

Thank you, Attorney. I really appreciate this. I will show him your message.

GUD PM PO ATTY. PUEDE PO BANG CLARIFY WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NO BAIL REQUIRED AGAINST NO BAIL RECOMMENDED. THANK YOU PO

may case is bp 22 sa lending company un brother ko umaatend dahil nasa abroad ako now my brother is in abroad too at nakatanggap ang sister ko ng arraignment letter this coming august pero walang alam ang sister ko about the case paano po ang dapat namin gawin pareho kaming nasa abroad pwede ba kami pagawa letter sa abogado since pareho kaming wala ng brother ko sa pinas. thanks po

Good afternoon Atty.,

I would like to inquire if in the event the BP 22 case was pursued and the Judge decided for the accused to pay the penalty (what could be the maximum and minimum penalty?) and the accused is only capable of paying the penalty in terms -would the term payment be allowed? She is capable of coming into terms but not the whole amount if ever. Please let us know. thanks.