In the Philippine legal landscape, Batas Pambansa Bilang 22 (BP 22), or the "Bouncing Checks Law," remains one of the most litigated penal statutes. While the law is strict—punishing the mere act of issuing a worthless check regardless of the intent—the full payment of the check amount provides several defensive avenues for an accused.
While payment does not automatically erase criminal liability once the crime is "consummated," it significantly alters the trajectory of the legal proceedings.
1. Payment Within the Five-Day "Grace Period"
The most potent defense involving payment is found in Section 2 of BP 22. Under this provision, the "presumption of knowledge of insufficiency of funds" does not arise if the maker pays the holder the amount due, or makes arrangements for payment in full by the drawee, within five (5) banking days after receiving notice that the check was dishonored.
- Legal Effect: If payment is made within this window, the prosecution loses its primary tool for proving "knowledge of insufficiency of funds," which is an essential element of the crime. Without this presumption, a conviction becomes nearly impossible for the prosecution to secure.
2. Payment Before the Filing of the Information
If payment is made after the five-day period but before the criminal case (the "Information") is formally filed in court, it serves as a strong ground for the dismissal of the complaint at the Preliminary Investigation stage.
- Basis: The prosecutor may determine that there is no "prima facie" case or that the "injury" to the complainant has been cured. While the technical violation occurred, the lack of damage often leads to a finding of no probable cause or a recommendation for dismissal in the interest of justice.
3. Payment as a Basis for a "Motion to Dismiss" or "Demurrer"
If the case has already reached the court, full payment can be used as a basis for a Motion to Dismiss (usually via an Affidavit of Desistance by the complainant).
- Affidavit of Desistance: Once the complainant is paid in full, they typically execute a sworn statement expressing their lack of interest in pursuing the case.
- Court’s Discretion: While the State technically owns the criminal prosecution, Philippine courts often dismiss BP 22 cases upon proof of full payment because the primary purpose of the law—to maintain the stability of the banking system and satisfy the debt—has been achieved.
4. The "Novation" Defense
In certain instances, if the parties agree to a new payment scheme (e.g., replacing the bounced check with an installment plan or a new set of checks) before the criminal information is filed, the defense of Novation may apply.
- Theory: The original obligation (the bounced check) is extinguished and replaced by a new contract. If this happens early enough, it can prevent the criminal liability from attaching, as the nature of the obligation has shifted from a potential criminal act to a purely civil one.
5. Payment as a Ground for the "Preference of Fine"
Even if a conviction is handed down, full payment is a critical factor in sentencing. Under Supreme Court Administrative Circular No. 12-2000 (as clarified by A.M. No. 00-11-01-SC), there is a "Policy of Preference" regarding the penalties for BP 22.
- Fine Instead of Imprisonment: If the accused has paid the face value of the check, the court has the discretion to impose a fine (usually double the amount of the check) instead of imprisonment.
- Criteria: The court considers the "good faith" of the accused. Full payment is the strongest evidence of good faith and the lack of intent to defraud.
6. Settlement via the Philippine Mediation Center (PMC)
BP 22 cases are among those subject to Mandatory Court-Annexed Mediation.
- Outcome: If the accused pays the full amount (or reaches a settlement agreement) during mediation, the criminal case is archived and eventually dismissed once the terms are satisfied. This is a highly effective way to terminate the case legally without a full-blown trial.
Summary Table: Impact of Payment on BP 22
| Timing of Payment | Legal Strategy/Ground | Likelihood of Case Termination |
|---|---|---|
| Within 5 days of Notice | Prevention of Legal Presumption | Very High (Prevents filing) |
| During Prelim. Investigation | Motion to Dismiss / No Probable Cause | High |
| During Trial | Affidavit of Desistance / Mediation | High (Subject to Court approval) |
| After Conviction | Appeal / Application of Fine Only | Limits penalty to Fine only |
Important Note: In the Philippines, the civil action for the recovery of the face value of the check is deemed "impliedly instituted" with the criminal action. Therefore, full payment of the check satisfies the civil liability, leaving the court with only the "punitive" aspect of the law to consider, which is frequently waived upon the complainant's satisfaction.