Trespassing in Thailand

In the matter of the offence of trespassing in Thailand. This which has been outlined in Sections 362, 363 as well as Section 364 of the Thailand Penal Code or Thai Criminal Code. Likewise also see the articles on misappropriation as well as theft and assault. Note that trespassing in Thailand may be classified differently in the West. Likewise also see the articles on here about murder in Thailand, charged with assault as well as fraud in Thailand. You can browse this website about Thai criminal law.

Section 362

Firstly, Section 362 describes that any individual who, with intent, encroaches upon immovable property belonging to another. Note however that this with the aim of either taking possession of said property in part or in its entirety, or engaging in actions that disrupt the peaceful possession of the rightful owner. This person will face punitive measures. These measures may include imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year, a fine not surpassing two thousand Baht, or both, as stipulated by the law. Note that this would fall under squatting laws as well as trespassing laws in the West.

Case Example

Looking at an example in this case. The two defendants engaged in destructive behavior by throwing bottles and damaging doors at the property. They had knives while threatening the victims. However, they did not physically enter the victims’ rooms. Consequently, they fail to meet the requisite elements of the offense as per Section 362. They had however been convicted on Section 358 of the Criminal Code. This is the offense of causing damage to property. Supreme Court Judgment No. 3523/2541.

Firstly the defendant trespassed onto the plaintiff’s land. Then constructed a house and erected a fence. Then, maintaining occupation of the land up to the date of the lawsuit. This prolonged occupation constitutes a violation of Section 362 of the Criminal Code. However, the plaintiff, without filing a complaint, initiated legal action after a lapse of three months from the date of discovering the offense and identifying the perpetrator. This legal action effectively nullified the statute of limitations. Supreme Court Judgment No. 3241/2524.

Likewise Section 363, it is evident that the law extends over those with similar intent. Those who seek to appropriate someone’s immovable property for personal gain or the benefit of a third party. This by unlawfully removing or destroying boundary markers or the property itself, whether in whole or in part. Likewise, the perpetrator subjects themselves to the possibility of imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, a fine not exceeding six thousand Baht, or both, in accordance with legal provisions.

Case Example

As an example of a case before the courts is an action under Section 363 of the Criminal Code. The act of manipulating or even destroying a property boundary marker constitutes an offense only when the marker in question is an authentic representation of real estate rights. In cases where wooden stakes or temporary boundary markers are removed.

This especially those placed by a court sergeant for survey or mapping purposes, they do not qualify as boundary markers under this section and therefore do not constitute an offense. So there are two different types of property markers. The one is a temporary marker while the other is a permanent government marker. Supreme Court Judgment No. 2861/2517.

Section 364

Additionally Section 364 addresses scenarios where individuals, without justifiable cause, intrude upon dwelling places, storehouses, or offices under the possession of another. Should such individuals persist in their trespassing. This despite being duly instructed to vacate the premises by the rightful possessor. Then, they will be subject to penal sanctions. These sanctions may entail imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year, a fine not exceeding two thousand Baht, or both, as prescribed by law.

Furthermore, in cases where the aforementioned offences are compounded by additional aggravating factors, such as acts of violence (assault) or threats thereof, the carrying of arms, participation by two or more individuals, or the occurrence of the transgression during the night, the severity of the punishment escalates.

Section 365

Likewise Section 365, perpetrators may face imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years, a fine not exceeding ten thousand Baht, or both, depending on the circumstances of the offence.

It is crucial to note that, save for the provisions outlined in Section 365, the offences described within this chapter are deemed compoundable offences, as stated in Section 366. This provision underscores the legal framework’s acknowledgment of the possibility for resolution through mutual agreement between the parties involved, albeit within the confines of the law.

Petty Offences

Two examples give here. The first is where the police already knew the defendant as they had searched his house before. He was not certain if this was real police or if they where fake police. He did not cooperate with them. There is no need to ask the defendant’s name and address again said the court. The defendant did not provide his name and address as asked by the police. Therefore, it is not an offense according to the Criminal Code, Section 367. Supreme Court Judgment No. 3231/2531.

Case Example

An example of court judgement where many of there laws have been transgressed is in another court case. The person had multiple charges and the fines had been as follows. The penalty has been reduced to half. Charged with insults (insulting the police) under Section 136, imprisoned for 15 days. Charged with resisting and obstructed, Section 138, paragraph two, imprisoned for 15 days.

Charged with losing property under Section 358, imprisoned for 15 days. Charged with carrying weapons under Section 371, fined 50 baht. Charged with giving a false name, Section 367, fined 50 baht, total. Imprisoned for 45 days, fined 100 baht, the prison sentence was changed to detention according to Section 238 of the Criminal Code.

Section 368

Likewise Section 368, individuals are obligated to adhere to lawful orders issued by officials vested with legal authority. Refusal to comply with such orders without reasonable cause or excuse may result in imprisonment for a period not exceeding ten days. Additionally, a fine not exceeding five hundred Baht, or both. Moreover, if the order pertains to assisting in official duties as authorized by law, the penalty may escalate to imprisonment for a period not exceeding one month, a fine not exceeding one thousand Baht, or both.

The police and traffic police might be different in terms of these orders. The police might tell you to come to the police station tomorrow or later. Failure to act will create an issue. There is a case where the traffic police gave an order but the defense was that it was not a written instruction. You will need to speak to a Thailand criminal court lawyers as this can be very complicated.

Section 369

Additionally Section 369 addresses actions aimed at obstructing official duties by tampering with notifications, posters, or documents posted by officials. Such conduct incurs a fine not exceeding five hundred Baht. Yet again it is beast not to alter or move official instructions from the government when in Thailand. Do not tamper, deface or move official notifications.

Section 370

highlights the consequences of causing public disturbances without reasonable cause, imposing a fine not exceeding one hundred Baht. This is mainly for those who set off firecrackers. Most will accept firecrackers during a festival however setting them off for no reason will become a police problem. The same goes for building contractors who work and drill after about 6 in the evening. In the West this would be disturbance of the peace.

Section 371

Likewise while this section prohibits the open carrying of arms in public places without reasonable cause. Offenders face fines not exceeding one hundred Baht and the potential forfeiture of said arms by the court.

Section 372

Likewise this Section in the law penalizes public quarrels or disturbances with fines not exceeding five hundred Baht. This is very common in Thailand. Note however that this does not fall under disturbance of the peace as I noted above.

Section 373

In the context of legal responsibility towards vulnerable individuals. This is covered in Section 373 which mandates the proper supervision of insane persons, with failure to do so resulting in fines not exceeding five hundred Baht.

Section 374

This likewise addresses scenarios where individuals fail to render reasonable assistance to persons in life-threatening situations. Likewise, imposing imprisonment for a period not exceeding one month, a fine not exceeding one thousand Baht, or both. This is a bit of a contentious issue not only in Thailand but in Asia in general. Note that there are no “Good Samaritan” laws like in the West.

Section 375

Likewise this imposes penalties for obstructing public drainage systems. This is another common issue. There are fines not exceeding five hundred Baht. You will find restaurants throwing the oil or other matter into a drain instead of disposing of it correctly.

Section 376

This Section addresses the reckless discharge of firearms in crowded areas. This is not a major issue in the country. When done they will impose imprisonment for a period not exceeding ten days, a fine not exceeding five hundred Baht, or both.

Section 377

This mandates responsible care of ferocious animals to prevent harm to persons or property. This is a common issue with Pitbull’s in Thailand. The owner is responsible for what the dog does. There are however many strays in the streets of Thailand. Penalties including imprisonment for a period not exceeding one month, a fine not exceeding one thousand Baht, or both. Most times these get settled privately.

Section 378

This penalizes public intoxication and disorderly behavior with fines not exceeding five hundred Baht. For those who walk around drunk you will note that this is a criminal offence.

Section 379

Likewise engaging in fights with the display of arms. This is a major issue in Thailand. Much like the issues as I noted above in Section 372. This however incurs imprisonment for a period not exceeding ten days, a fine not exceeding five hundred Baht, or both.

Section 380

Note that this addresses the contamination of public water sources, imposing imprisonment for a period not exceeding one month, a fine not exceeding one thousand Baht, or both. There are few examples one can talk about like waste into a river or disposing of toxic liquids into a canal.

Section 381

Note that this mandates the humane treatment of animals, penalizing cruelty. Note that this comes mainly to play with animal fights. There is an example of cock fights where they placed razor blades on the cocks legs to kill each other. These attract jail sentences for a period not exceeding one month, a fine not exceeding one thousand Baht, or both. The sentences are still very light in Thailand.

Section 382

Likewise not that this law now addresses the unreasonable overworking of animals. This would be rare as most of the country’s has now mechanized their agriculture. Buffaloes are not in wide use any longer. The fines for this is imprisonment for a period not exceeding one month, a fine not exceeding one thousand Baht, or both.

Section 383

This penalizes the failure to render assistance during emergencies. Likewise see also Section 374 above. The penalties are imprisonment for a period not exceeding one month, a fine not exceeding one thousand Baht, or both.

Section 384

Note that this again addresses the dissemination of false reports with the intent to cause alarm. These have been used a few times during the outbreak of Covid. Likewise they impose imprisonment for a period not exceeding one month, a fine not exceeding one thousand Baht, or both.

Section 385

This section penalizes the obstruction of public thoroughfares. In other words you are not allowed to block a road. Likewise they impose fines not exceeding five hundred Baht.

Section 386

Likewise this addresses unauthorized obstructions on public roads. Likewise see above. They impose fines not exceeding five hundred Baht.

Section 387

Again this Section penalizes actions likely to cause harm to passersby, with fines not exceeding five hundred Baht.

Section 388

Important to not that laws on indecent acts in public are penalized with fines not exceeding five hundred Baht. This includes verbal as well as physical. The scope of “committing other obscene acts” as stipulated in Section 388 of the Criminal Code extends beyond physical actions to encompass verbal expressions. Therefore, uttering words such as “Fucking your mother” in public constitutes a violation of Section 388 of the Criminal Code. Yes, swearing in public in Thailand is a criminal offence. Supreme Court Judgment No. 1069/2506

Section 389

This addresses actions likely to cause harm or nuisance. Likewise imposing imprisonment for a period not exceeding one month, a fine not exceeding one thousand Baht, or both.

Section 390

Lastly this addresses negligence causing harm. The example given is that of reckless driving. The case involves the defendant overtaking a parked stone truck. Likewise, entering the path of the co-plaintiff’s car on the opposite side of the road, resulting in a collision. The defendant’s failure to exercise sufficient caution in overtaking parked vehicles constitutes negligence rather than an unavoidable accident.The punishment for this is imposing prison for a period not exceeding one month, a fine not exceeding one thousand Baht, or both.

Section 391

This Section addresses non-violent acts of aggression. Two people fight and the one guy places a machete on the neck of the other. It left a red mark but not a wound. This is an offence. Supreme Court Judgment No. 1937/2531. Note that this is not the same as assault. This imposes imprisonment for a period not exceeding one month, a fine not exceeding one thousand Baht, or both.

Section 392

The threats of violence. The plaintiff in this case alleges that while in a house with a girl, they were subjected to intimidation by the defendants. The daughter of the first defendant called out to the plaintiff. Likewise urging them to come outside with threats of physical harm. Such conduct, inducing fear and intimidation, falls within the limits of the offenses outlined in the Criminal Code, Sections 392 and 83. This will incur imprisonment for a period not exceeding one month, a fine not exceeding one thousand Baht, or both.

Section 393

Likewise this Section of the Thai criminal code penalizes public insults. (Note the piece I wrote above on swearing in public). The defendant recounts an incident involving themselves and teachers at the school, where they felt they were being treated as servants by the victim. Although the defendant used the term “lacker,” which may be perceived as disrespectful. Therefore, the defendant’s words were not intended to insult the victim within the context of Section 393 of the Criminal Code.

Now on the flip side addressing monks, who are generally respected by the public, with derogatory terms like “Monk with a ghost face” constitutes an insult to their dignity and honor. Likewise the penalty is imprisonment for a period not exceeding one month, a fine not exceeding one thousand Baht, or both. See also Section 397 below to compare.

Section 394

Here we address the intrusion of animals onto cultivated lands. Likewise the penalty is the imposing imprisonment for a period not exceeding one month, a fine not exceeding one thousand Baht, or both. This is different to the following section of the law.

Section 395

Very important section which addresses negligence in animal supervision. The example would be the following case. The cow, jointly owned by the defendant and his father-in-law, is under the defendant’s sole care and supervision. By allowing the cows to graze unsupervised during the day and returning them to the pen in the evening. The defendant effectively acts as an animal controller as defined in Section 395 of the Criminal Code. Therefore, the defendant’s neglect in controlling the cows, resulting in damage to the crops of the injured party, constitutes an offense under this section. imposing fines not exceeding five hundred Baht.

Section 396

Lastly this penalizes the improper disposal of carcasses. This comes with fines not exceeding five hundred Baht.

Section 397

Note that here I will address public harassment. We can see this in the following case which came before the Supreme Court in Thailand. The defendant’s words, uttered directly to the victims in public, were indeed rude and impolite. However, they did not specifically insult the injured officer. Therefore, the offense does not fall under Section 393 of the Criminal Code. Nevertheless, considering the context, manner, and timing of the defendant’s words, they were likely to cause annoyance and distress to the injured officer. Consequently, the defendant’s actions constitute an offense under Section 397 of the Criminal Code. Note that this will be punished by imposing imprisonment for a period not exceeding one month, a fine not exceeding one thousand Baht, or both.

Section 398

Lastly the last Section addresses the mistreatment of dependents. Likewise this imposes imprisonment for a period not exceeding one month, a fine not exceeding one thousand Baht, or both.

In conclusion, adherence to the stipulated laws and regulations is paramount to maintaining public order and ensuring the well-being of all individuals within society.