Article 134/4Mise en garde avant l'interrogatoire de l'accusé

Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section

1. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 1514/2565 (2022)

   Under Section 134/4(1) the accused may choose to give a statement or not, but a bare refusal to answer on a key fact does not by itself displace other evidence bearing on guilt.

   In a drink-driving case, the accused declined to answer whether he had been drinking. The Court noted that although Section 134/4(1) gives the right to remain silent, that fact was important to proving guilt or innocence, and the refusal did not overcome the blood-alcohol evidence.

2. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 8572/2563 (2020)

   A confession taken in compliance with Section 134/4, given voluntarily and without threat or inducement, is hearsay that may be admitted under Section 226/3 paragraph two(1) to support other evidence where its nature and source make it credible.

   The officer testified the accused confessed voluntarily without coercion, and the record showed compliance with Section 134/4. The Court held the investigation-stage confession was hearsay whose nature, source, and circumstances made it reliable under Section 226/3, so the appeal court properly used it with other evidence.

3. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 8192/2561 (2018)

   Where the accused willingly gave a truthful statement and the record shows compliance with the rights procedures, the investigation-stage statement may be relied on to prove guilt under Section 134/4 paragraph last.

   The Court found the accused had willingly given a truthful statement to the inquiry official without inducement, so the investigation-stage statement could be used as evidence of guilt under Section 134/4 paragraph last, alongside independent evidence such as mobile-phone location records.

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