Article 121: Pouvoir de l'enquêteur et exigence de plainte

Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section

1. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 626/2565 (2022)

   A member of a savings group who has deposited money with it is herself an injured person under Section 2 (4) where that money is embezzled, and may complain without authority from the other members or from the committee. A complaint validly made under Section 121 paragraph two gives the inquiry official power to investigate and the prosecutor power to bring the case.

   Money that members had deposited with a savings group for production went missing while in the hands of the three defendants, whom the committee had chosen to look after it. The Supreme Court held the committee was an injured person under Section 2 (4) and could authorise someone to complain, and that the person it authorised was herself a depositing member and so an injured person in her own right, who could complain without authority from anyone. The complaint was valid, every member did not have to complain, the investigation was lawful and the prosecutor had power to bring the case. The Court of Appeal Region 5 had held otherwise and was reversed, and the case was sent back so that the remaining appeal points could be decided.

2. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 404/2565 (2022)

   A person who is not the injured party by law under Section 2(4) has no right to lodge a complaint for a compoundable offence such as embezzlement; the investigator therefore has no power to investigate under Section 121 paragraph two, and the prosecutor has no power to file. This is a public-order point the court can raise on its own.

   Because the person who lodged the complaint was not the injured party by law, he had no right to complain about the alleged joint embezzlement, a compoundable offence. The investigator thus had no power to investigate under Section 121 paragraph two and the prosecutor no power to file. The Supreme Court raised the point on its own even though most defendants had not appealed it.

3. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 3578/2564 (2021)

   Where the true injured party has not lodged a complaint for a compoundable offence such as joint mischief (damage to property), the investigator has no power to investigate under Section 121 paragraph two, the prosecutor has no power to file, and the victim cannot claim compensation in that count.

   The true victim of the property damage had not lodged a complaint, so the investigator had no power to investigate that charge under Section 121 paragraph two. The Supreme Court held the prosecution of that count was unlawful and the victim could not obtain compensation for the motorcycle repair in that count.

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