306 SCRA 90



Complainant  was  a  radio  commentator  who  interviewed  the  two  accused regarding  their  marketing  business,  which  solicits  funds  from  the  general public,  promising  an  800%  profit.    The  latter  induced  the  complainant  to invest  in  the  business,  in  the  process  thereof,  issued  a  postdated  check wherein  the  amount  in  figures  was  P1,200,000  and  the  amount  in  words was P1,000,200.   The check when presented in the bank was dishonored and the accused refused to redeem or pay the check.  This prompted the complainant to file a case of estafa against the accused to which they were
found guilty of.   


Accused tried to contend that if the trial court followed the admission and stipulation  of  facts  submitted  by  them,  it  would  prove  that  there  was sufficient  funds.    The  check  had  a  discrepancy  between  the  amount  in figures   and   in   words.      Following   NIL,   the   check   was   issued   for P1,000,200—meaning   that   this   could   be   validly   supported   by   their business’  funds.    Nonetheless,  this  is  misplaced  since  this  rule  of interpretation  finds  no  room  in  this  case.    The  agreement  was  perfectly clear  that  at  the  end  of  21  days,  the  investment  of  complainant  would increase by 800% or P1,200,000.