T. Bouncing Checks Law (BP 22; AC 12-2000 and 13-2001)

Bouncing Checks Law (B.P. Blg. 22)

Concept

B.P. Blg. 22 penalizes the making or drawing and issuance of a check without sufficient funds or credit. It covers a check issued to apply on account or for value when the drawer knows at issuance that it cannot be paid in full upon presentment. (Preamble, Batas Pambansa Blg. 22)¹ (Sec. 1, Batas Pambansa Blg. 22)²

Governing provisions

Section 1 states the punishable acts, penalties, and liability of persons who sign checks for an entity. Section 2 provides a prima facie presumption of knowledge of insufficient funds or credit. Section 3 governs the drawee’s notation of dishonor and its evidentiary effect. Section 4 defines credit as an arrangement or understanding with the bank for payment of the check. (Sec. 1, Batas Pambansa Blg. 22)² (Sec. 2, Batas Pambansa Blg. 22)³ (Sec. 3, Batas Pambansa Blg. 22)⁴ (Sec. 4, Batas Pambansa Blg. 22)⁵

Requisites / Rules

• The drawer makes or draws and issues a check to apply on account or for value, knowing at issuance that funds or credit with the drawee are insufficient to pay it in full upon presentment. The bank subsequently dishonors it for that insufficiency, or would have dishonored it for that reason but for an unjustified stop-payment order. (Sec. 1, Batas Pambansa Blg. 22)²
• Section 1 also punishes a drawer who initially has sufficient funds or credit but fails to maintain enough to cover the full check when it is presented within 90 days from the date appearing on it and is dishonored for that reason. (Sec. 1, Batas Pambansa Blg. 22)²
• For a check drawn by a corporation, company, or other entity, the person or persons who actually signed it on the entity’s behalf are liable under the Act. (Sec. 1, Batas Pambansa Blg. 22)²
• The statutory penalty is imprisonment of 30 days to one year, a fine subject to the statutory limit of ₱200,000, or both, at the court’s discretion. (Sec. 1, Batas Pambansa Blg. 22)²

Distinctions

Do not confuse the two 90-day rules. Under Section 1, timely presentment matters to liability for failure to maintain initially sufficient funds or credit. Under Section 2, presentment within 90 days is a condition for prima facie evidence that the drawer knew of the insufficiency. (Sec. 1, Batas Pambansa Blg. 22)² (Sec. 2, Batas Pambansa Blg. 22)³

Key doctrines

The presumption of knowledge arises only upon proof that the drawer received notice of dishonor and failed to pay or arrange payment within five banking days. A bare denial of receipt ordinarily cannot overcome positive testimony and an affidavit proving service. Electronic service may be used when the contact details are known, verified, and attributable to the drawer or an authorized representative. (Carlos v. People, G.R. No. 277047, 15 April 2026)⁶

A dishonored check bearing the drawee’s stated reason for refusal is prima facie evidence of its issuance, due presentment, dishonor, and the stated reason for dishonor. The drawee must explicitly state insufficient funds or credit when that is the fact, even if it received a stop-payment order. (Sec. 3, Batas Pambansa Blg. 22)⁴

Exceptions

Section 2’s prima facie evidence of knowledge does not apply if, within five banking days after receiving notice of dishonor, the drawer pays the holder the amount due or arranges payment in full by the drawee. A stop-payment order does not avoid Section 1 when the check would have been dishonored for insufficient funds or credit and the order lacked a valid reason. (Sec. 2, Batas Pambansa Blg. 22)³ (Sec. 1, Batas Pambansa Blg. 22)²

Bar tip

Work from issuance and the drawer’s funds or credit, then identify the ground of dishonor, the applicable 90-day rule, proof of receipt of notice, and any payment or arrangement within five banking days. (Sec. 1, Batas Pambansa Blg. 22)² (Sec. 2, Batas Pambansa Blg. 22)³ (Carlos v. People)⁶