A practical legal article (Philippine context) on what estafa is, when it applies, where to file, how the process works, and what “below ₱1M” changes in terms of penalties and court jurisdiction.

1) What “Estafa” Means in Philippine Criminal Law

Estafa is the crime of swindling under Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC). In everyday terms, it punishes fraud—taking another’s money or property through deceit, abuse of trust, or fraudulent acts, causing damage to another.

Although people use “estafa” loosely for many unpaid obligations, not every nonpayment is estafa. The law generally requires fraud, not merely a broken promise or business loss.

2) The Main Types of Estafa (How It’s Commonly Committed)

Article 315 covers several patterns. The most common real-world scenarios fall into these buckets:

A. Estafa by abuse of confidence / misappropriation (Art. 315(1)(b))

This is the classic “pinagkatiwalaan” case:

You received money/property in trust, or for administration, or under an obligation to return/deliver it (e.g., agent, collector, broker, treasurer, consignee).
You misappropriated, converted, or denied receiving it.
The owner suffers damage.

Typical examples

An agent collects payments for a principal then keeps them.
A person receives money to buy materials but uses it for personal expenses and refuses to return it.

B. Estafa by false pretenses / fraudulent acts (Art. 315(2))

This is “naloko” through deception:

Fraudulent representation (e.g., pretending to own property; fake authority; fake identity; fake investment).
The victim relies on the deception and gives money/property.
The victim is damaged.

Typical examples

Selling land you don’t own or can’t sell, using forged papers.
Fake online selling with deliberate misrepresentation.

C. Estafa through issuance of bouncing checks (Art. 315(2)(d)) — situational

This overlaps with B.P. Blg. 22 (BP 22). Estafa is possible when the check is used as part of deceit (not always automatic). BP 22, meanwhile, punishes the act of issuing a bouncing check itself, with its own elements and timelines.

3) The Non-Negotiables: What the Prosecution Must Prove

While the exact elements depend on the paragraph charged, most estafa cases revolve around these core requirements:

A. Deceit or abuse of confidence

Deceit: the accused used lies or fraudulent means that induced the victim to part with property; or
Abuse of confidence: the accused had lawful possession due to trust, then unlawfully converted it.

B. Damage or prejudice

Damage can include:

Actual loss (money/property not returned),
Loss of opportunity,
Being compelled to pay another, etc.

C. Causal connection

The damage must be a result of the deceit/abuse.

Important distinction: If the facts show only failure to pay a debt with no fraud at the beginning (or no trust relationship), the case may be civil, not criminal.

4) Why “Below ₱1,000,000” Matters: Penalties and Court Jurisdiction

A. Penalty brackets depend largely on the amount involved

Under Article 315 (as adjusted by later value updates), the penalty increases as the amount increases. For amounts below ₱1,000,000, these ranges are commonly relevant:

₱40,000 or less → lower penalty ranges (generally within arresto mayor to prision correccional, depending on the exact bracket)
Over ₱40,000 up to ₱200,000 → prision correccional (medium to maximum) (still not more than 6 years at the top end)
Over ₱200,000 up to ₱600,000 → prision correccional (maximum) to prision mayor (minimum) (now the maximum goes beyond 6 years)
Over ₱600,000 up to ₱1,200,000 → prision mayor (minimum to medium) (definitely beyond 6 years)

So, for ₱600,001 to ₱999,999, you’re typically looking at prision mayor (min to med) territory.

Takeaway: Below ₱1M does not mean “minor.” Some below-₱1M estafa cases carry prison exposure well beyond six years depending on the bracket.

B. Which court has jurisdiction (MTC/MeTC/MCTC vs RTC)?

As a practical rule, jurisdiction follows the maximum imposable penalty:

If the maximum penalty does not exceed 6 years → First-level courts (MTC/MeTC/MCTC)
If the maximum penalty exceeds 6 years → Regional Trial Court (RTC)

In many estafa cases:

₱200,000 or less often stays in first-level court territory (because the top end can be 6 years).
More than ₱200,000 commonly pushes the maximum beyond 6 years, so the case is typically for the RTC.

Practical checkpoint for “below ₱1M”:

₱1 to ₱200,000 → often MTC/MeTC

₱200,001 to ₱999,999 → often RTC

(Exact charging, paragraph, and proven amount still matter.)

5) Where You File: The Usual Route and Venue Rules

A. Where to file initially: Office of the City/Provincial Prosecutor

Most complainants start by filing a criminal complaint-affidavit with the prosecutor’s office where venue is proper.

B. Venue (where the case should be filed)

Venue is usually proper where any essential element occurred, commonly:

Where the money/property was delivered or received,
Where the deceit was employed and relied upon,
Where the misappropriation occurred (fact-specific),
Where the offended party was induced to part with property.

If events happened in multiple places (e.g., online transactions), venue analysis becomes fact-heavy. When in doubt, complaints are often filed where the complainant handed over funds/property or where the accused received it.

6) Is Barangay Conciliation Required First?

Generally, no for typical estafa cases, because the penalties exceed the barangay conciliation coverage thresholds. Estafa complaints are commonly filed directly with the prosecutor.

7) Preliminary Investigation: When It Applies (and Why You Care)

A. If the imposable penalty is at least 4 years, 2 months, and 1 day

A preliminary investigation (PI) is generally required. Many estafa cases—especially above ₱40,000 and certainly above ₱200,000—end up in PI.

B. What PI is (in plain terms)

Preliminary investigation is not a trial. It is a prosecutor-led process to decide whether there is probable cause to file an Information in court.

C. What happens in PI

You file your complaint-affidavit and evidence.
The respondent is ordered to submit a counter-affidavit.
You may file a reply (and sometimes rejoinder).
The prosecutor resolves whether to dismiss or file in court.

8) The Filing Package: What to Prepare (Strongly Recommended)

A. Core documents

Complaint-affidavit (detailed narration, chronological)
Supporting affidavits (witnesses, if any)
Proof of identity (IDs)
Proof of transaction:
- Contracts, receipts, acknowledgments, deposit slips
- Bank transfer records, remittance receipts
- Screenshots of chats/emails (with context)
- Delivery receipts, inventory lists (if property)

B. For misappropriation-type estafa (trust/agency cases), emphasize:

Proof money/property was received in trust or for a specific purpose
Proof of obligation to return/deliver/account
Proof of demand (see below) and refusal/failure to account

C. For deceit-type estafa, emphasize:

The specific false representation (what was claimed, when, how)
Proof it was false
Proof you relied on it when you gave money/property
Proof of damage

D. Demand letter: not always legally mandatory, but often crucial

In many misappropriation cases, demand helps prove conversion/intent. A good demand packet includes:

Written demand (served with proof: personal service with receiving copy, courier with tracking, email + follow-up, etc.)
Clear deadline
Itemized amounts and factual basis

9) After the Prosecutor Files in Court: What Comes Next

Once an Information is filed:

Court issues a warrant or summons depending on circumstances and the judge’s determination.
Arraignment (plea of accused)
Pre-trial
Trial
Judgment

Bail

Estafa is generally bailable (before conviction), with bail amount depending on the charge and circumstances.

10) Civil Liability and Recovery of Money (What People Often Miss)

A. Criminal case usually carries civil liability

In many criminal cases (including estafa), the civil action for restitution/damages is impliedly instituted unless reserved or separately filed. That means the court can order:

Restitution (return of the amount/property),
Actual damages,
Possibly moral/exemplary damages (fact-dependent),
Interest (often argued based on circumstances).

B. Settlement: what it can and cannot do

Returning money or settling may help resolve civil exposure and may influence prosecutorial discretion, but estafa is a public offense.
An “affidavit of desistance” does not automatically dismiss a case once the state pursues it; it is evidence the prosecutor/court may weigh.

11) Common Pitfalls That Get Estafa Complaints Dismissed

It’s really just a debt. No deceit at the start, no trust relationship—just failure to pay.
Weak proof of “entrustment.” For 315(1)(b), you must show the accused received the property with duty to return/deliver/account.
Unclear deceit. For 315(2), you must identify the exact false statement and show reliance.
Amount not supported by documents. Amount affects penalty and jurisdiction—document it (receipts, bank proof, ledger + corroboration).
Screenshots without context/authentication. Provide full conversation threads, account identifiers, dates, and tie them to proof of payment/delivery.

12) BP 22 vs Estafa (Checks) — Quick Practical Guide

If the issue involves a bouncing check:

BP 22 focuses on issuance of a worthless check and required notices/time elements.
Estafa requires deceit or abuse of confidence and is more fact-intensive.

They can sometimes be filed together depending on facts, but they are not identical and one is not guaranteed just because the other exists.

13) Prescription (Time Limits) and Timing Strategy

Estafa prescribes depending on the penalty classification (light/correctional/afflictive). Because amounts below ₱1M can still carry prision mayor ranges (afflictive), the prescriptive period can be longer than people assume.

Practical advice: Don’t sit on it. File while evidence, witnesses, and transaction records are still available.

14) A “Below ₱1M” Walkthrough Example (How a Lawyer Typically Frames It)

Scenario: You gave ₱850,000 to a “broker” who promised placement in an investment; you later learn the investment was fictitious.

A strong estafa theory typically lays out:

Specific misrepresentation (what was said, proof it was false),
Inducement (you paid because of it),
Receipt of funds (bank record),
Damage (no return; opportunity loss),
Badges of fraud (fabricated documents, inconsistent explanations, multiple victims, evasiveness).

Because ₱850,000 is well above ₱200,000, this often lands in RTC-level exposure (depending on paragraph charged and proven amount) and proceeds through preliminary investigation.

15) Practical Checklist Before You File

Identify which estafa theory fits: entrustment + conversion vs deceit at the start
Organize a timeline (dates, amounts, communications)
Gather proof of payment (bank slips/transfers)
Gather transaction documents (contracts, receipts, acknowledgments)
Save and print complete chat/email threads
Prepare and serve a demand letter (especially for entrustment cases)
Identify witnesses (who saw delivery, admissions, meetings)
Compute the total amount supported by documents (avoid inflated claims)

16) Final Notes (Practical, Not Theoretical)

Filing estafa for amounts below ₱1,000,000 is less about the number and more about the story the evidence can prove: fraud or trust abused + damage. The amount mainly affects penalty severity and which court will hear it—often making the difference between first-level court and RTC once you go beyond ₱200,000.

If you want, paste a short anonymized fact pattern (how money was given, what was promised, what documents exist), and I can map it to the most likely Article 315 paragraph, the usual weak points, and the evidence structure prosecutors tend to look for.