PEOPLE V. GROSPE
157 SCRA 154
FACTS:Parolan was an authorized wholesale dealer of SMC. He was charged with violations of BP22 and estafa for allegedly issuing checks in favor of SMC but when the check was presented, it was dishonored for having insufficiency funds. This is even more aggravated by the allegation that Paralan failed to make good the check to the prejudice of SMC.
HELD:Estafa by postdating or issuing a bad check may be a transitory or continuing offense. Its basic elements of deceit and damage may arise independently in separate places. In this case, it did and jurisdiction may be conferred in any of the two places wherein the two elements arose.
For while the subject check was issued in Bulacan, it wasn't completely drawn thereat, but in Pampanga. What is of decisive importance is the delivery thereof. The delivery of the instrument is the final act essential to its consummation as an obligation. For although the check was received
by the SMC Supervisor in Bulacan, that was not delivery in the contemplation of law. The rule is that the issuancve as well as the delivery of the check must be to a person who takes it as a holder, which means the payee or indorser of a bill or note, who is in possession of it, or the bearer thereof. The said representative had to forward the check to the SMC regional office, who thereafter forwarded it to the Finance Officer and later on to the depository bank.