The Pasay City regional trial court (RTC) has ordered the arrest of a businessman and an alleged employee of Solaire Resort North for estafa for reportedly swindling P12 million from a company engaged in the wholesale distribution of electronic parts and communications equipment.
Ordered arrested were businessman Lavish Mohan Paryani and Reigna Reyes, who reportedly works as senior buyer in Solaire North’s procurement department.
The arrest order, which was furnished to the Philippine National Police (PNP) and the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), was issued by Judge Ronald August L. Tan of Branch 112 of Pasay City RTC.
Published reports stated that Reyes was arrested last Friday, Oct. 11, by operatives of the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group-Southern District Field-Unit (CIDG-SDFU). Paryani, however, remains at large.
The Pasay City Prosecutor’s Office filed the estafa case against Paryani and Reyes based on a complaint lodged by Rheana’s Trading, Inc. (RTI), represented by Maria Anita T. Turqueza. Filipino-Indian Rajiv Chandiramani is one of the principal stockholders of RTI.
RTI, through Turqueza – the firm’s corporate treasurer and duly authorized representative -- claimed that Chandiramani and Paryani have known each other for several years.
The complaint stated that it was also Paryani who requested Chandiramani to arrange a business meeting with RTI together with Reyes.
On April 4, 2024, a business meeting was held with Paryani and Reyes accompanied by the alleged directors of Ley Lahs 888 International Trading, Inc.
During the said meeting, the complaint also stated that Paryani and Reyes claimed that they are the owners of Ley Lahs and that they have legitimate business dealings with Solaire North for the supply of premium products which are being used as prizes to the patrons and guests of the resort hotel.
Turqueza said Reyes claimed that she had strong connections with Solaire and even presented purchase orders issued to Ley Lahs by the resort hotel for the purchase of various goods consisting mostly of high-end electronics and home appliances amounting to P20 million.
Paryani and Reyes then reportedly asked RTI to immediately grant them a loan in the amount of P10 million supposedly intended to fund their previous procurement transactions.
Paryani and Reyes allegedly obligated themselves to return the principal loan amount of P10 million within 90 days with an additional interest of P2 million. They issued a check in the amount of P12 million to pay for the loan and the supposed interest.
However, the complaint stated that Paryani and Reyes avoided communication with the RTI after obtaining the loan. It also stated that the bank account which the check was supposed to be drawn from had already been closed.
At the same time, it was found that the purchase orders presented by Paryani and Reyes as proof of their business transactions with Solaire were found to be spurious.
In her counter-affidavit, Reyes denied being present during the April 4 meeting with RTI officials and being part of Ley Lahs. She also denied having issued a check.
Paryani, on the other hand, failed to submit his counter-affidavit despite subpoena issued against him.
In indicting Paryani and Reyes before the RTC, Pasay City Senior Assistant Prosecutor Marcos F. Dela Cruz Jr. said the evidence submitted by the complainant were sufficient to establish prima facie evidence to charge the respondents with estafa.
“It is the criminal fraud or deceit in the issuance of a check which is made punishable under the Revised Penal Code, and non-payment of a debt,” stated Dela Cruz’s resolution which was approved by Pasay City Prosecutor Elmer Cris L. Rillo.
“The postdating or issuing of a check in payment of an obligation when the offender had no funds in the bank or his funds deposited therein are not sufficient to cover the amount of the check is a false pretense or a fraudulent act,” the resolution also stated.
Paryani and Reyes were charged with violation of Article 315, paragraph 2 (d) of the Revised Penal Code.
The complaint for violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, the Anti-Bouncing Check Law, was dismissed "for lack of prima facie evidence."