Republic of the Philippines

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
National Prosecutorial Service
OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR
Malabon City

CITY GOVERNMENT OF
MALABON represented by Office
of the City Treasurer,
Complainant,

-versus-

MR. RALPH MELVIN

VERGARA,
Respondent.
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

CASE NO. _________

For: Violation of Batas
Pambansa 22 and/or
Estafa

AFFIDAVIT COMPLAINT

The City Government of Malabon duly represented by the

Office of the City Treasurer with office address at Malabon City Hall,
Sevilla Boulevard, San Agustin, Malabon City after having duly
sworn to in accordance with law do hereby depose and say :

1. That the Complainant is formally charging respondent

RALPH MELVIN VERGARA, legal age, Filipino, and owner of RMV

1
Hair Salon located at 210 M. H. Del Pilar Street, Santulan, Malabon
City for violation of Batas Pambansa 22, otherwise known as
Bouncing Checks Law and/ or Estafa committed as follows:

a) That sometime on 20 January 2020, respondent issued a

check[1] under no. 0000262728 in favor of the City Government of
Malabon amounting to Thirty Four Thousand One Hundred Sixty
Seven Pesos and 61/100( Php 34,167.61);

b) That the abovementioned check was drawn and issued by

the respondent as payment for his business tax incurred for the
previous year;

c) Respondent made an assurance and representation that the

said check he issued and delivered was a good check and would
be covered by sufficient funds when presented for payment;

d) However, when the above-mentioned check was deposited,

the same was dishonored and returned by the Asia United Bank,
Malabon City Branch, on the ground that the same was Drawn
Against Insufficient Fund(DAIF);

e) To its dismay, Complainant immediately notified said

respondent of the dishonor and return of the said check and
demanded from him to make good the said check within a reasonable
period of ten(10) days from notice thereof.

f) Complainant exerted efforts in trying to collect the obligation

of the respondent. When said respondent failed to heed in the
demands, Complainant endorsed the said check to the legal office
who immediately sent a formal demand letter through personal
service dated 6 November 2020[2] wherein it demanded from the
respondent to pay its respective cash equivalent within five(5) days
from receipt thereof;

g) As of date however, respondent has unjustifiably ignored all

these demands to pay the said account and/or to redeem the said
returned check;

1
Annex “A”
2
Annex “C”

2
 h) Despite the issued demand letter asking for payment, the
respondent unjustly and unlawfully refused to pay his already due
and demandable obligation.

i) As a result of respondents’ deceitful machinations and

fraudulent representations as an efficient cause of the defraudation in
issuing and delivering the subject check in payment of his obligation ,
Complainant suffered uncollected amount of Thirty Four Thousand
One Hundred Sixty Seven Pesos and 61/100( Php 34,167.61) ;

2) Thus, Complainant is formally charging the respondent for

committing the crime of violation of Batas Pambansa Bilang 22 (“BP
22”) by making or drawing and issuing check to apply on account or
for value, knowing at the time of issue that respondent does not have
sufficient funds in or credit with the drawee bank for the payment of
such check in full upon its presentment, which check is subsequently
dishonored by the drawee bank for insufficient funds/account closed
or would have been dishonored for the same reason had not the
drawer, without any valid reason, ordered the bank to stop payment;

3) Likewise, an Estafa case should be lodged against the

respondent due to the presence of the following elements that he
committed: (1) the respondent has post-dated or issued a check in
payment of an obligation contracted at the time of the postdating or
issuance; (2) at the time of postdating or issuance of said check, the
respondent has no funds in the bank or the funds deposited are not
sufficient to cover the amount of the check; and (3) the complainant
has been defrauded.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this

________day of ________________2020, at Malabon City.

City Government of Malabon

Represented by The Office of City Treasurer

3
 AMALIA C. SANTOS,
Ph.D Representative

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN before me this ______day of

___________ 2020, at Malabon City Philippines; Affiant exhibited to
me her identifying evidence as required by the Rules, who signed the
said instrument in my presence. I further certify that I have
personally examined the affiant and I am convinced that the same is
her own free and voluntary act and deed.

_______________________
Prosecuto

4
r