Article 191: Explaining Doubts in Enforcing a Judgment
Statutory text (Thai original)
เมื่อเกิดสงสัยในการบังคับตามคำพิพากษาหรือคำสั่ง ถ้าบุคคลใดที่มีประโยชน์เกี่ยวข้องร้องต่อศาลซึ่งพิพากษาหรือสั่ง ให้ศาลนั้นอธิบายให้แจ่มแจ้ง
English translation
When a doubt arises in the enforcement of a judgment or order, if any person having an interest concerned petitions the court that rendered the judgment or order, that court shall give a clear explanation.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified. Always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 191 provides the mechanism for clarifying, as opposed to altering, a decision under Title 3 on judgments and orders. When genuine doubt arises about how a judgment or order is to be enforced, an interested person may petition the same court, which must explain its decision clearly. The remedy is explanatory only; it works alongside Section 190, which forbids substantive amendment of a pronounced decision, so the court cannot use an explanation to change the result or restructure a penalty. In practice it is invoked in enforcement disputes, for example over how imprisonment terms are counted or combined.
Why this matters in practice
This section is a useful tool when you or a prison authority disagree over exactly what a judgment requires, for example whether sentences run together or one after another. File a petition with the court that issued the judgment and ask it to explain, but do not expect it to change the sentence: for that you need a timely appeal. If enforcement of a criminal decision has real consequences for you, it is worth taking advice from a lawyer first through an online consultation with a Thai lawyer.
Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section
-
Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 1330/2563 (2020)
A petition under Section 191 asks the court only to explain a doubt about its judgment; where the judgment itself is already clear, there is nothing to explain.
After being acquitted with the seized mobile phone ordered forfeited, the defendant petitioned under Section 191 for the trial court to explain doubts about the judgment, because the prison had downgraded his prisoner class and cut good-time based on his possession of a phone. The trial court found its judgment was already clear, illustrating that the Section 191 remedy is explanatory and limited to genuine doubt about the decision.
-
Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 5416/2550 (2007)
Section 191 allows an interested person only to ask the court that gave the judgment or order to explain a doubt arising in its enforcement. It is not a route to alter the result, and the trial court accordingly ruled it had no power to aggregate the sentences in sixteen final judgments. A fresh petition on the same ground, after the first had been finally decided, is a barred repeat petition under Civil Procedure Code Section 148 with Section 15, a public-order question the Supreme Court may raise of its own motion under Section 195 paragraph two with Section 225.
On 30 January 2001 the defendant petitioned the trial court to aggregate the terms of imprisonment in sixteen cases so that they would not exceed twenty years under Penal Code section 91(2). The trial court dismissed the petition and the Court of Appeal Region 5 affirmed, and that decision became final. The defendant then filed a fresh petition on the same ground. The Supreme Court held that this was a repeat petition on an issue already finally decided, barred by Civil Procedure Code section 148 with section 15, and that as a question of public order it could raise the point itself. It therefore did not decide whether section 191 permits a court to alter the result of final judgments; that proposition was the trial court's reasoning on the earlier petition, not a holding of this decision.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Cited in 4 Supreme Court decisions (1966 to 2020)
Décisions de citation sélectionnées
- Decision 1330/2563 (2020)
- Décision 391/2509 (1966)
- Decision 5416/2550 (2007)
- Decision 1475/2536 (1993)
Cette liste est sélectionnée automatiquement, en privilégiant les jugements qui reposent sur cet article plutôt que sur ceux qui se contentent de le citer lors du prononcé de la peine. Elle n'a pas encore été examinée par le cabinet.
Calculé sur l'ensemble du corpus de 83 652 décisions de la Cour suprême du cabinet, de 1921 à 2026. Le décompte est exhaustif ; la plage d'années indiquée élimine les valeurs aberrantes rares afin de refléter la répartition réelle des citations. Ces chiffres sont calculés par nos soins et ne constituent pas des statistiques officielles de la Cour. Comment nous les comptons et ce que nous avons mesuré
Foire aux questions
Que puis-je faire si un jugement pénal n'est pas clair sur la manière dont il doit être exécuté ?
En vertu de l'article 191, toute personne intéressée peut demander au tribunal ayant rendu le jugement de l'expliciter. Le tribunal clarifie alors le sens du jugement, sans toutefois le modifier.
Un tribunal peut-il modifier la sentence lorsqu'il motive un jugement en vertu de l'article 191 ?
Non. La cour peut seulement préciser la portée de son jugement. Modifier la peine constituerait une modification de fond interdite par l'article 190 ; la voie appropriée est l'appel.
Guides connexes sur ThaiLawOnline
Citer cette section
-
Citation simple
Criminal Procedure Code, s. 191 (Thailand) -
Citation académique
Criminal Procedure Code (Thailand), s. 191. ThaiLawOnline, https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-criminal-procedure-code/section-191/ (accessed 1 septembre 2026). -
Citation thaïlandaise
ป.วิ.อ. มาตรา 191 -
Lien permanent
https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-criminal-procedure-code/section-191/ -
Intégrer sur votre site
<blockquote cite="https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-criminal-procedure-code/section-191/"><p>En cas de doute sur l'exécution d'un jugement ou d'une ordonnance, si une personne ayant un intérêt concerné saisit le tribunal qui a rendu le jugement ou l'ordonnance, ce tribunal doit fournir une explication claire.</p><footer>Criminal Procedure Code, s. 191 (Thailand): <a href="https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-criminal-procedure-code/section-191/">ThaiLawOnline</a></footer></blockquote>
The Thai text is authoritative. The English is an unofficial translation by ThaiLawOnline, free to reuse with attribution.