You are on page 1of 2

Republic of the Philippines) Makati City ) s.s.

COMPLAINT-AFFIDAVIT I, Vice Ganda, Filipino citizen, single with residence address of 5 Pompom Street, Makati City, after having been sworn to in accordance with law, do hereby depose and state that: 1. On January 05, 2010, at 10:00 in the evening, Piolo Pascual went to my house to buy from me a pair of diamond earrings, worth P1,000,000 (ONE MILLION PESOS).
2. On the same day, Piolo issued 5 checks. The first check in the amount of

P200,000 ( TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS) was dated on January 2, 2011. The rest of the checks were dated February 01, 2011, March 01, 2011, April 01, 2011, and, May 01, 2011, respectively. Piolo Pascual assured that all checks will be good.
3.

The first (dated January 02, 2011) of the five checks was made good and encashed. When the 2nd check (dated February 01,2011) was deposited, it was returned by the bank on the ground that it was drawn against insufficient funds. All the other checks were likewise deposited and retuned on the ground that it was drawn against insufficient funds.

4. Thereafter, I consulted with my counsel, Atty. Bebe Gandanghari on the matter. Atty. Gandanghari drafted a demand letter in my behalf, dated June 06, 2011, and personally served and received on the same day to Piolo Pascual in his residence at 102 Don Manuel Agregado St., Sta. Mesa Heights, Quezon City.
5. In the demand letter, it was stated that Piolo Pascual has 10 days, from

receipt of the demand, to settle in full the outstanding balance. Otherwise he will be criminally sued for Estafa and Violation of B.P. 22. 6. Notwithstanding such demand, Piolo Pascual did not pay. .
7. In the light of the above-cited incident, it is evident that Piolo Pascual

committed the crime of Estafa under Article 315, paragraph 2(d) of the Revised Penal Code Article 315, paragraph 2(d) of the Revised Penal Code states that : Art. 315. Swindling (estafa). x x x. xxxx d) [By post-dating a check, or issuing a check in payment of an obligation when the offender therein were not sufficient to cover the amount of the check. The failure of the drawer of the check to deposit the amount necessary to cover his check within three (3) days from receipt of notice from the bank and/or the payee or holder that said check has been dishonored for lack of insufficiency of funds shall be prima facie evidence of deceit constituting false

pretense or fraudulent act. (As amended by R.A. 4885, approved June 17, 1967.)
8. The elements of estafa under Art. 315, Par. 2(d) of the Revised Penal

Code, are: (1) a check is postdated or issued in payment of an obligation contracted at the time it is issued; (2) lack or insufficiency of funds to cover the check; (3) damage to the payee thereof.
9. Piolo Pascual committed all of the elements of the crime of Estafa under

the Article 315, paragraph 2(d) of the Revised Penal Code, thus: a. that Piolo Pascual issued postdated checks on January 05, 2010 for the payment of the pair of diamond earrings bought from Vice Ganda, in the amount of P200,000 per check, dated January 2, February 01, March 01, April 01, and May 01, 2011, respectively; b. that there was insufficient funds to cover the check; and c. Damage to Vice Ganda resulted therefrom.

In view of the foregoing, I am executing this affidavit in order to charge Piolo Pascual of the crime of estafa under Art. 315, Par. 2(d) of the Revised Penal Code. All the allegations in this affidavit are based on the personal knowledge and experience of the complainant. Makati City, February 15, 2012. VICE GANDA Affiant

CERTIFICATION Subscribed and sworn to before me this 15th day of February, 2012 in the City of Makati. This is to certify that the affiant personally appeared before me and verified that she executed this affidavit-complaint, has read the contents of the same and that the contents thereof are true and correct of her own knowledge and information based on the available records.

Flordeliza M. Santos Office of the City Prosecutor