A practical legal article for the Philippine context (informational; not legal advice).

1) What BP 22 Is and Why It Exists

Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, commonly called the Bouncing Checks Law, penalizes the making, drawing, and issuance of a check that is later dishonored by the bank due to insufficient funds (or lack of credit), as well as certain related situations involving stop-payment orders without valid reason.

BP 22 is treated as a special penal law and generally described as malum prohibitum—the act is punishable because the law prohibits it, regardless of intent to defraud. Its policy goal is to protect the integrity of checks as a substitute for cash and to prevent the harm bouncing checks cause to commerce and public confidence in the banking system.

2) The Conduct Penalized by BP 22

BP 22 broadly punishes two main forms of conduct:

A. Issuing a check that bounces for lack of funds/credit

A person issues a check that is later dishonored because:

the drawer had insufficient funds, or
the drawer had no funds, or
the drawer had insufficient credit with the drawee bank.

B. Issuing a check and ordering the bank to stop payment without a valid reason

A person issues a check and then causes it to be dishonored by issuing a stop payment order without valid cause, especially when the issuer does not make the check good after notice.

(“Stop payment” is not automatically illegal—there can be legitimate reasons. The problem arises when it’s used to defeat payment without lawful justification.)

3) What Counts as a “Check” Under BP 22

In practice, BP 22 applies to checks drawn against a bank, including:

dated checks and post-dated checks (PDCs)
checks issued for immediate payment, installments, or as security for an obligation (common in lending/financing and rentals)

Key point: Even if a check is issued merely as “guarantee” or “security,” it can still fall under BP 22 once it is presented and dishonored—because the law focuses on the issuance of the check and the harm caused by dishonor.

4) The Core Elements of a BP 22 Offense

While court phrasing varies, BP 22 liability usually turns on these essentials:

A person makes/draws/issues a check.
The check is issued to apply on account or for value (including payment of an existing obligation).
The check is dishonored by the drawee bank for insufficient funds or lack of credit (or dishonored due to stop payment without valid cause).
The issuer knew at the time of issuance that there were insufficient funds/credit or the law’s presumption of knowledge applies.
The issuer fails to pay or make arrangements for payment within the statutory period after receiving notice of dishonor.

Because “knowledge” can be hard to prove directly, BP 22 relies heavily on presumptions and procedural requirements (especially the notice requirement).

5) Presentment Rule: The Check Must Be Deposited/Presented on Time

BP 22 includes a critical timing condition: the check must be presented to the bank within 90 days from the date of the check.

If the check is presented beyond the 90-day period, BP 22 prosecution becomes significantly harder and may fail because a key statutory condition is not met.
Practically, payees should deposit promptly, and drawers should assume a check can be presented any time within that 90-day window.

6) The Notice of Dishonor Requirement (and Why It’s Often the Battleground)

A. What “notice of dishonor” means

After a check bounces, the issuer must be notified that:

the check was presented, and
it was dishonored (e.g., “DAIF,” “insufficient funds,” “account closed,” etc.).

B. Why notice matters

BP 22 provides a chance to cure: the issuer is given a short statutory period to make the check good. If proper notice isn’t proven, many BP 22 cases fail.

C. The 5 banking day “grace period”

After receiving notice of dishonor, the issuer typically has five (5) banking days to:

pay the holder the amount of the check, or
make arrangements for payment (in a manner that effectively makes the check good)

If the issuer pays within this period, the presumption of knowledge is defeated and criminal liability may not attach (depending on how the facts line up and how the payment is documented).

D. How notice is usually served

Common proof methods include:

personal service with acknowledgment/receipt
registered mail with proofs of mailing and receipt
other competent evidence that the issuer actually received notice

Important practical point: In real cases, the most common weakness is not the bank return memo—it’s the lack of admissible proof that the issuer received notice.

7) Presumption of Knowledge of Insufficient Funds

BP 22 creates a presumption that the issuer knew of insufficient funds/credit if:

the check is dishonored, and
the issuer fails to pay the holder the amount due (or make arrangements) within five banking days after receiving notice of dishonor.

This presumption is powerful, but it depends on proving receipt of notice and failure to cure within the period.

8) Penalties Under BP 22 (and How Courts Commonly Sentence)

A. Statutory penalty range

BP 22 provides penalties that may include:

imprisonment (up to one year), or
fine (often described as up to double the amount of the check, subject to a statutory ceiling), or
both, at the court’s discretion.

B. Sentencing policy in practice (fine vs. jail)

Although imprisonment is legally available, Philippine courts—guided by Supreme Court policy issuances over time—often lean toward imposing a fine rather than incarceration, especially when:

the amount is paid or substantially paid,
the accused is not a repeat offender,
circumstances show the case is essentially a collection dispute that escalated.

That said, jail is still possible, particularly when:

there are multiple checks,
there is defiance of court processes,
there is no effort to pay,
aggravating circumstances appear.

9) BP 22 vs. Estafa (Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code)

A bouncing check can also implicate estafa (swindling) in some situations, especially where deceit and damage are present.

Key differences

BP 22 focuses on the issuance of a check that bounces (harm to public confidence and commercial practice).
Estafa focuses on fraud/deceit causing damage (a different legal theory with different elements).

Can both be filed?

Yes, depending on the facts, a complainant may attempt to file:

BP 22, and
Estafa (if deception and damage can be proven)

They are generally treated as distinct offenses with different elements. Whether both will prosper depends on evidence; estafa is often harder to prove than BP 22.

10) Corporate Checks: Who Gets Charged?

Because criminal liability is personal, the usual accused is the natural person who signed the check (e.g., president, treasurer, authorized signatory), not the corporation as an “accused” in the same way.

Typical outcomes:

The signatory may face criminal prosecution.
The corporation may face civil liability for the underlying obligation.
Other officers are not automatically liable unless evidence links them to issuance/authorization in a way recognized by law and jurisprudence.

11) Common Defenses in BP 22 Cases

BP 22 cases frequently turn on technical and evidentiary points. Common defenses include:

No valid proof of notice of dishonor
- If receipt of notice is not proven, the statutory presumption and cure period cannot operate properly.
Payment within five banking days from notice
- Documented payment can defeat the presumption of knowledge.
Check presented beyond 90 days from date
- Weakens or negates a statutory condition.
Bank dishonor not for insufficiency of funds/credit
- Example: irregular signature, stale check issues, frozen account due to legal hold, etc. (The specific dishonor reason matters.)
The accused did not “issue” the check in the legal sense
- E.g., forged signature or unauthorized signing (though this becomes a factual contest).
Valid cause for stop payment
- If dishonor is due to stop payment, the “valid cause” and the surrounding facts matter greatly.

12) Procedure: How BP 22 Cases Usually Move

A. Demand letter and documentation

Most complainants first send a formal demand/notice of dishonor, attach:

the check/s,
bank return slip/memo,
proof of notice and receipt,
proof of the underlying transaction (loan, purchase, rent, etc.)

B. Filing a complaint with the Prosecutor’s Office

BP 22 cases typically begin with a criminal complaint for preliminary investigation (or the appropriate summary procedure depending on local rules and the court involved).

C. Court filing and trial

BP 22 is commonly tried in first-level courts (e.g., Metropolitan Trial Courts / Municipal Trial Courts), because the imprisonment exposure is up to one year.

D. Bail and settlement

Accused persons are often entitled to bail. Many cases end in:

settlement/payment arrangements, and/or
plea bargaining (depending on the prosecutor/court stance and local practice), and/or
dismissal if evidence is insufficient (often notice issues).

13) Prescription (Time Limits to File)

BP 22, as a special law, generally follows prescription rules under Act No. 3326, which—based on the penalty range—commonly yields a four (4)-year prescriptive period in many BP 22 contexts.

Exactly when the clock starts can be legally sensitive (e.g., tied to dishonor and/or discovery and prosecutorial action). As a practical matter, parties should act promptly and not assume long delays are safe.

14) Venue: Where the Case May Be Filed

Venue in criminal cases depends on where essential elements occurred. In BP 22 practice, disputes often arise over whether filing is proper in:

the place where the check was issued,
the place where it was delivered/received, and/or
the place where it was dishonored (location of the drawee bank)

Courts look at the facts and the law on what constitutes an essential ingredient for venue purposes. If venue is challenged, it can be case-dispositive.

15) Civil Liability: You Can Still Be Ordered to Pay

Even though BP 22 is criminal, courts often address the civil aspect:

payment of the check amount,
legal interest (in proper cases),
damages (when proven),
costs

Payment or settlement does not automatically erase criminal exposure, but it frequently affects:

prosecutorial discretion,
court appreciation of penalty,
willingness of complainant to pursue.

16) Practical Guidance (Philippine Reality Check)

If you are issuing checks

Treat every check as cash-equivalent within 90 days from its date.
Keep sufficient funds before issuance and throughout the likely presentment period.
If a check bounces, take notice letters seriously—the 5 banking day window is critical.
Communicate in writing and document any payments or arrangements.

If you are receiving checks

Deposit/present the check well within 90 days.
If dishonored, secure bank documentation of the reason for dishonor.
Serve a proper notice of dishonor/demand and preserve proof of receipt.
Keep records of the underlying transaction, not just the check.

17) Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Is BP 22 automatically “criminal” even if it was just a loan/security check? Yes. A check used in a loan, installment plan, or as security can still trigger BP 22 once it is presented and dishonored, subject to the legal requirements (timely presentment, notice, failure to cure).

Q: If I pay later, am I safe? Paying later helps, but the most legally significant window is within five banking days from receipt of notice of dishonor. Payment after that may mitigate penalties and facilitate settlement, but it may not eliminate liability.

Q: Can someone go to jail for BP 22 today? Yes, imprisonment remains legally possible, but courts often impose fines depending on circumstances and prevailing Supreme Court policy guidance.

Q: Do I need a demand letter before filing? What matters legally is notice of dishonor with proof of receipt and the opportunity to cure. A demand letter is commonly used to satisfy and document that requirement.

18) Bottom Line

BP 22 is less about “fraud” and more about accountability for issuing checks that do not clear, with strict attention to:

timely presentment (90 days),
proper notice of dishonor, and
failure to pay within five banking days after notice.

Because outcomes often hinge on documentation and technical proof (especially notice), both payees and issuers should treat bounced checks as a legal emergency—and handle them with careful written records.

If you want, I can also provide:

a sample notice of dishonor/demand letter structure (payee-side), or
a checklist of defenses and evidence (issuer-side) in a courtroom-ready outline format.