REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE
Office of the City Prosecutor
Tarlac Court Building, Romulo Boulevard, Tarlac City

ROBERTO SENTRY
REYNALDO,
Complainant,
NPS Docket No. INVF-123-456-789
-versus- For: Estafa/ Violation of BP 22

BLACKAGAR BOLTAGON
and MAXIMUS BOLUDO.
Respondents.
x---------------------------------------------x

COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT

I, BLACKAGAR BOLTAGON, Filipino, of legal age, single and a resident of No. 1234 Romulo
Blvd., Brgy. San Vicente, Tarlac City, state under oath, as follows:

1. That I am accused for the crime of Estafa/ Violation of BP 22, now pending before the
Office of the City Prosecutor Tarlac City.

2. That I once helped a former friend MAXIMUS BOLUDO with his business start-up
sometime last year.

3. That Mr. Boludo was able to persuade two major investors to put up much needed capital,
for a total of about P2M. One of them is the complainant ROBERTO SENTRY
REYNALDO who gave him P1M, and asked him for a check in return.

4. That since Mr. Boludo did not have a checkbook of his own, he asked me to issue the check
instead, which I did, for P1M in favor of his investor, Mr. Reynaldo.

5. That he gave the check to Mr. Reynaldo and assured me that he would deposit the money
in my account within 30 days from the time I issued the check but he never did.

6. That the business of Mr. Boludo failed to take off and the investor tried to encash the check
but it bounced and learned of this because last month, I received a letter from the investor’s
lawyer that the check bounced.

7. That I tried calling Mr. Boludo but he disappeared. He never paid the P1M to me, or to the
investor who gave him money. He has stopped taking my calls or messages on Facebook.

8. That the act of allowing Mr. Boludo to use my checking account is because I reposed trust
and confidence to him as he seemed to be a good and trustworthy person and a long-time
friend.
 9. That there were no written stipulation or contract that will show or prove my involvement
or partnership to the said business of Mr. Boludo.

10. That Mr. Reynaldo, as an investor was presumed to have a knowledge that I have no
involvement nor a partner in the business of Mr. Boludo. Therefore, the requirement for a
person to be held liable for Estafa through issuance of unfunded checks under B.P. 22 “(1)
Postdating or issuance of a check in payment of an obligation contracted at the time the
check was issued.” is not present, because there was no existing obligation between me
and the complainant since the beginning.

11. That my current account was only use to accommodate the obligation of Mr. Boludo. In
the case of Ruiz v. People (G.R. NO. 160893 November 18, 2005) the court only punished
the party who had the obligation to pay Ms. Sonia P. Ruiz and not the owner of the
Checking Account Ms. Gina Parro.

12. That I am executing this counter affidavit to attest to the truth of the foregoing statement
and to support for the dismissal of the case filed against me.

TO THE TRUTH OF THE FOREGOING, I have signed this Counter Affidavit on 12 October 2018
in Tarlac City, Tarlac.

[sgd.]
BLACKAGAR BOLTAGON
Affiant

CERTIFICATION

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 12 October 2018 in Tarlac City.

I hereby certify that I have personally examined the Affiant and I am satisfied that he voluntarily executed
and understood his Counter-Affidavit.

[sgd.]
MATTHEW MURDOCK MERCADO
Investigating Prosecutor