Estafa by postdating a check
Estafa by postdating a check - Hacked sex cam account
We culled them from a pleading our law office recently prepared for a client.We removed items that refer to the personal identities of the parties and the like.
It was later found out that petitioners never made any deposits in the said Banks under the name of PSI.
It is uncontroverted that PSI did not apply for and secure loans from RBBI and RBLI.
In fine, PSI and co-petitioner Basilio Ambito were engaged in a vendor-purchaser business relationship while PSI and RBBI/RBLI were connected as depositor-depository.
it is indispensable that the element of deceit, consisting in the false statement or fraudulent representation of the accused, be made prior to, or at least simultaneously with, the delivery of the thing by the complainant; and that false pretense or fraudulent act must be committed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud, it being essential that such false statement or representation constitutes the very cause or the only motive which induces the offended party to part with his money.
Thus: The elements of Estafa by means of deceit, whether committed by false pretenses or concealment, are the following – (a) that there must be a false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means.
In every criminal prosecution, however, the identity of the offender, like the crime itself, must be established by proof beyond reasonable doubt.
In this case, the Prosecution established that Ligaray had released the goods to Cañada because of the postdated check the latter had given to him; and that the check was dishonored when presented for payment because of the insufficiency of funds.The false pretense or fraudulent act must be committed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud, it being essential that such false statement or representation constitutes the very cause or the only motive which induces the offended party to part with his money.In the absence of such requisite, any subsequent act of the accused, however fraudulent and suspicious it might appear, cannot serve as basis for pxxx cution for estafa under the said provision. In order to constitute estafa under Article 315(2)(d) of the Revised Penal Code, the act of postdating or issuing a check in payment of an obligation must be the efficient cause of the defraudation. In that regard, the Prosecution did not establish beyond reasonable doubt that it was accused Wagas who had defrauded Ligaray by issuing the check.This means that the offender must be able to obtain money or property from the offended party by reason of the issuance of the check, whether dated or postdated. Firstly, Ligaray expressly admitted that he did not personally meet the person with whom he was transacting over the telephone.We repeat hereinbelow what we had argued in our previous pleadings before this Honorable Office.