Prescription Period for B.P. Blg. 22 (Bouncing Checks Law) — A 2025 Philippine Legal Primer
1. What “prescription” means in BP 22
Prescription is the time-bar that extinguishes the State’s right to prosecute a bouncing-check case. Once the period lapses, the court must dismiss the criminal action motu proprio or on motion, and the civil liability on the check reverts to an ordinary money claim. (Prescriptive Period for Violation of B.P. Blg. 22 Tolled Only Upon Filing of Charge in Court – Legisperit Publications)
2. Statutory foundation
| Source | Key provision |
|---|---|
| B.P. Blg. 22 (1979) | Creates the offense; does not set its own prescriptive period. (BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 22 - The Lawphil Project) |
| Act No. 3326 (1926) | Fills the gap for all special laws: 4-year prescription when the penalty does not exceed 6 years. (Act No. 3326 - The Lawphil Project) |
| Rules on Summary Procedure (A.M. No. 00-11-01-SC, eff. 15 Apr 2003) & 2022 Rules on Expedited Procedures | Place BP 22 under summary/expedited procedure; special rule on when prescription is tolled (see §5-B below). (Prescriptive Period for Violation of B.P. Blg. 22 Tolled Only Upon Filing of Charge in Court – Legisperit Publications) |
3. Length of the period: Four (4) years
Because BP 22’s maximum imprisonment is one (1) year, Act No. 3326 sets the prescriptive period at four years from the commission of the offense. (Prescriptive Period for B.P. Blg. 22 - Criminal Law)
4. When does the clock start?
| Step | Event | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Check is presented within 90 days from its date. | Required by §1, BP 22. (BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 22 - The Lawphil Project) |
| 2 | Drawee bank dishonors the check. | The last factual element occurs. |
| 3 | Written notice of dishonor reaches the issuer. | This triggers the 5-bank-day grace period to make good the check; until then no crime is consummated. (Notice of dishonor in BP 22.. - Atty. Robert Divinagracia) |
Hence, the 4-year period is reckoned from the 5th banking day after the issuer receives notice of dishonor—the moment the offense becomes complete. People v. Pangilinan, G.R. 152662 (13 Jun 2012). (G.R. No. 152662 June 13, 2012 - The Lawphil Project)
5. How is the period interrupted or suspended?
A. General rule under Act No. 3326
“Prescription shall be interrupted when proceedings are instituted against the accused, and shall resume when the proceedings are dismissed on grounds not amounting to jeopardy.” (Act No. 3326 - The Lawphil Project)
B. What counts as “proceedings”? – Evolution in the case law
| Era | Governing rule | Leading cases |
|---|---|---|
| Pre-2003 (before BP 22 was placed under summary procedure) | Filing of a complaint with the Prosecutor’s Office or any court already tolls prescription. | Panaguiton v. DOJ (G.R. 167571, 25 Nov 2008) (G.R. No. 167571 November 25, 2008 - The Lawphil Project); rooted in the classic doctrine of People v. Olarte (1960) (G.R. No. 152662 June 13, 2012 - The Lawphil Project) |
| From 15 Apr 2003 onward | Because BP 22 is now covered by the Revised Rule on Summary Procedure, §11 provides that prescription is interrupted only when the complaint-information is filed in court, not merely with the prosecutor. | Republic v. Desierto (G.R. 136506, 16 Jan 2023) limits Panaguiton to offenses committed before 15 Apr 2003. (Prescriptive Period for Violation of B.P. Blg. 22 Tolled Only Upon Filing of Charge in Court – Legisperit Publications) |
| 2025 clarification | In People v. Sangre (promulgated 4 Apr 2025) the Court announced that filing a sworn complaint with the DOJ again stops prescription for crimes under the 2022 Expedited Rules, harmonising Act 3326 with the newer procedural regime. (SC: Filing of Complaint Before DOJ Stops Prescriptive Period for Crimes) |
Practice tip: For checks issued after the 2003 cut-off but before the 2025 ruling becomes final & executory, conservative counsel should still assume that only the court-filing interrupts the period; invoke the 2025 case only when it has become final or when arguing for liberal application.
C. Other grounds for suspension
- Absence from the Philippines – applies by analogy to Art. 91, RPC. (G.R. Nos. 165510-33 July 28, 2006 - The Lawphil Project)
- Written extrajudicial demands do not suspend or reset the period.
- Administrative or demand letters alone are not “proceedings.” (Prescriptive Period for Violation of B.P. Blg. 22 Tolled Only Upon ...)
6. When does the clock resume?
If the criminal action is dismissed without jeopardy (e.g., for lack of jurisdiction, defective information, withdrawal by complainant before arraignment), the balance of the original 4-year period begins to run anew. Act 3326, §2. (Act No. 3326 - The Lawphil Project)
7. Worked-example
| Timeline | Counted toward 4 yrs? | Running total |
|---|---|---|
| 02 Jan 2021 – notice received | Grace period; offense not yet complete | 0 |
| 09 Jan 2021 – crime consummated | Clock starts | 0 |
| 01 Dec 2021 – complaint filed with prosecutor | No interruption (post-2003 rule) | 10 mos |
| 15 Feb 2022 – information filed in MeTC | Clock stops | 13 mos |
| 30 Aug 2023 – case dismissed without jeopardy | Clock resumes | 13 mos |
| 01 Jun 2024 – new case re-filed | Clock stops again | 29 mos |
| Remaining time before prescription: 19 months (i.e., until 09 Aug 2025). |
8. Consequences of prescription
| Stage reached when period lapses | Result |
|---|---|
| Before filing in court | Prosecutor must dismiss or refuse filing. |
| After filing but before arraignment | Court must dismiss sua sponte. |
| After arraignment | Accused may still raise prescription at any stage, even on appeal; dismissal results in acquittal. (G.R. No. 190834 November 26, 2014 - The Lawphil Project) |
Civil liability on the underlying obligation survives and may be pursued in a separate civil case.
9. Interaction with administrative circulars & pending reforms
- SC Administrative Circular 57-97 & 13-2001 discourage imprisonment and favour fine/mediation; they do not affect prescription. (Duterte orders reduction, condonation of real property taxes of IPPs ...)
- Several bills (17th–19th Congress) propose decriminalising BP 22 or replacing jail terms with higher fines; none has become law as of 30 Apr 2025. (BP 22 after 17 years | Inquirer Business)
10. Quick checklist for lawyers & litigants
- Identify the last element: date of notice + 5 banking days.
- Mark 4 years forward; create a running calendar.
- Ask: Was a court case filed within that window?
- If prosecutor-level filing only:
Before 15 Apr 2003 → tolled; After → not tolled (subject to 2025 ruling). - Track dismissals that may restart the clock.
- Pleaded too late? Raise prescription immediately; it is non-waivable and may be invoked on appeal.
Proper time-keeping often wins—or loses—a BP 22 case.
Select jurisprudence cited (chronological)
- People v. Olarte, L-13027 (30 Jun 1960) – complaint for preliminary investigation tolls prescription. (G.R. No. L-22465 February 28, 1967 - The Lawphil Project)
- Panaguiton v. DOJ, G.R. 167571 (25 Nov 2008). (G.R. No. 167571 November 25, 2008 - The Lawphil Project)
- People v. Pangilinan, G.R. 152662 (13 Jun 2012). (G.R. No. 152662 June 13, 2012 - The Lawphil Project)
- Lim v. People, G.R. 190834 (26 Nov 2014). (G.R. No. 190834 November 26, 2014 - The Lawphil Project)
- Republic v. Desierto, G.R. 136506 (16 Jan 2023). (Prescriptive Period for Violation of B.P. Blg. 22 Tolled Only Upon Filing of Charge in Court – Legisperit Publications)
- People v. Sangre, G.R. 255740 (04 Apr 2025) – DOJ-filing stops the clock under Expedited Rules. (SC: Filing of Complaint Before DOJ Stops Prescriptive Period for Crimes)
Bottom-line:
A BP 22 prosecution lives and dies by the four-year countdown. Know when it starts, how it pauses, and who must act to beat the clock. Mastery of these timelines is indispensable for both complainants wishing to prosecute and accused persons hoping for dismissal on prescription.