Article 112: Bail contract requirements

Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section

1. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 1262/2558 (2015)

   A bail contract entered because the court allowed provisional release of the accused or defendant with a bond, or a bond and security, is provided for in Section 112, while enforcement on breach of the bail contract falls under Section 119; enforcement of the bail contract is therefore purely a matter of criminal procedure, assessed in the context of the criminal case.

   In a dispute over enforcing a forfeited bail contract, the Supreme Court held that the bail undertaking arises under Section 112 and its enforcement under Section 119, so the surety's rights and duties must be judged within the criminal case rather than as an ordinary civil obligation.

2. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 4359/2558 (2015)

   The bail contract made when the court allows provisional release with a bond or with a bond and security is governed by Section 112, and enforcement upon breach by Section 119; being purely criminal procedure, the surety's obligation to surrender the accused or defendant is determined in the context of the criminal case.

   Addressing whether a request to extend enforcement was justified, the Supreme Court confirmed that the bail undertaking is grounded in Section 112 and enforced under Section 119, treating the surety's duty to produce the defendant as a criminal-procedure obligation.

3. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 4161/2535 (1992)

   The power of an inquiry official or the public prosecutor to fix the sum a surety must pay on breach of a bail contract comes from section 112(2), which requires the bail contract to state the sum payable on breach and forbids imposing duties beyond what the case requires. Section 5(2) of the Bad Cheque Act B.E. 2497, as amended in 1972, limits that power in a bad-cheque case by capping the sum at the amount of the cheque, so a bail contract fixing a larger sum is an act in excess of power and is ineffective as to the excess.

   In a bad-cheque prosecution the inquiry official granted provisional release on a bail contract fixing the surety's liability at 600,000 baht, although the cheque was for 500,000 baht. When the surety failed to produce the accused, the inquiry official sued on the contract. The Supreme Court held that section 5(2) of the Bad Cheque Act B.E. 2497, as amended by Revolutionary Council Announcement No. 196 of 8 August 1972, limits the power that an inquiry official or public prosecutor otherwise has under section 112(2) to fix such a sum as it thinks fit, so that the sum may not exceed the amount of the cheque. Fixing 600,000 baht was an act in excess of power and the contract could be enforced only up to the amount of the cheque.

Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.