G.R. No. L-42847 and L-42902. April 29, 1977.
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. CECILIA QUE YABUT and HON. JESUS DE VEGA, as Judge of the Court of First Instance of Bulacan, Branch II, respondents. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. GEMINIANO YABUT, JR., respondent.

FACTS

In two consolidated petitions, spouses Cecilia Que Yabut and Geminiano Yabut, Jr., as treasurer and president of Yabut Transit Line, respectively, were charged with estafa under Article 315, paragraph 2(d) of the Revised Penal Code before the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Bulacan. The informations alleged that in Malolos, Bulacan, they issued several checks to Freeway Tires Supply, owned by Alicia P. Andan, in payment for merchandise, knowing at the time of issuance that they had no or insufficient funds in their Caloocan City banks. The checks were subsequently dishonored. The respondents separately moved to quash the informations on two grounds: first, that venue was improperly laid in Bulacan since the checks were issued and delivered in Caloocan City; and second, that the facts charged did not constitute an offense because the checks were allegedly issued for a pre-existing obligation, which they argued was not covered by the law on estafa.
The trial judges granted the motions to quash solely on the ground of improper venue. Judge Jesus de Vega (for Cecilia’s case) and Judge Edgardo Paras (for Geminiano’s case) ruled that all essential elements of the crime—issuance, delivery, and dishonor of the checks—occurred within Caloocan City, not Bulacan. The issue of whether estafa lies for issuing a check for a pre-existing obligation was not ruled upon. The People, through the Solicitor General, filed these petitions for certiorari to review the quashal orders.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the CFI of Bulacan properly acquired jurisdiction over the estafa cases, or whether venue was improperly laid. A secondary, but prematurely raised, issue is whether Republic Act No. 4885 , which amended the estafa provision, penalizes the issuance of a worthless check in payment of a pre-existing obligation.

RULING

The Supreme Court reversed the orders of quashal and reinstated the informations. On the issue of venue, the Court held that the CFI of Bulacan correctly acquired jurisdiction. Venue in criminal cases is jurisdictional and is determined by the allegations in the information. The informations expressly alleged that the crime was committed “in the Municipality of Malolos, Province of Bulacan.” For estafa committed by means of deceit, the criminal action may be instituted in the place where the deceit was practiced or where the damage was caused. The Court found that the allegations sufficiently indicated that the false pretenses—the representation of having sufficient funds—were made in Bulacan to induce the delivery of merchandise there, and the resulting damage to the complainant, a resident of Bulacan, was sustained there upon dishonor of the checks. Since at least one essential ingredient of the offense allegedly occurred in Bulacan, venue was properly laid.
Regarding the second ground for quashal—that the checks were issued for a pre-existing obligation—the Court deemed it a matter of defense whose resolution is premature at the quashal stage. A motion to quash hypothetically admits the truth of the factual allegations in the information. The informations alleged the checks were issued “in payment of articles and merchandise delivered to and received by said accused,” which suggests a contemporaneous transaction, not necessarily a pre-existing debt. Whether the obligation was pre-existing is a factual question to be determined during