Article 33 — Consolidating the same case
Texte légal (original thaï)
คดีอาญาเรื่องเดียวกันซึ่งทั้งพนักงานอัยการและผู้เสียหายต่างได้ยื่นฟ้องในศาลชั้นต้นศาลเดียวกันหรือต่างศาลกัน ศาลนั้น ๆ มีอำนาจสั่งให้รวมพิจารณาเป็นคดีเดียวกัน เมื่อศาลเห็นชอบโดยพลการหรือโดยโจทก์ยื่นคำร้องในระยะใดก่อนมีคำพิพากษาแต่ทว่าจะมีคำสั่งเช่นนั้นไม่ได้ นอกจากจะได้รับความยินยอมของศาลอื่นนั้นก่อน
traduction anglaise
Where the same criminal case has been filed by both the public prosecutor and the injured person in the same court of first instance or in different courts, such courts have the power to order the cases to be consolidated and tried as a single case, whether on the court's own initiative or upon a plaintiff's motion at any stage before judgment is rendered. However, no such order may be made unless the consent of the other court has first been obtained.
Cette traduction anglaise est fournie à titre indicatif uniquement et n'a pas encore été vérifiée de manière définitive ; référez-vous toujours à l'original thaï.
Annotation de l'entreprise
Section 33 solves the practical problem that arises when the prosecutor and the injured person each file the same case, a situation the standing rules in Section 28 make possible. Rather than treating the second filing as a prohibited duplicate suit, the Code lets the court consolidate them into one proceeding, on its own initiative or on a plaintiff's motion before judgment, subject to the consent of any other court involved. Consolidation is for convenience of trial and does not merge the plaintiffs' separate procedural duties, such as the duty to appear under Section 166. This differs from an impermissible duplicate filing of the same case by the same party, which remains barred.
Pourquoi cela est important en pratique
If a prosecutor and you both filed the same case, ask for consolidation to avoid inconsistent results and wasted costs, but do not assume it merges your obligations. Even after cases are joined, each plaintiff must still meet duties such as appearing on the hearing date, or risk dismissal. If you are unsure whether your situation is a lawful parallel filing or a barred duplicate, get advice before you file the second case.
Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 21329/2556 (2013)
Because both the prosecutor and the injured person may prosecute, the injured person's filing after the prosecutor's is not a barred duplicate suit; Section 33 addresses such parallel cases and consolidation is at the court's discretion when it appears before judgment.
The appellate court held that no law bars the prosecutor from filing a case the injured person already filed, and Section 33 itself contemplates both filing the same case. The injured person's later suit was therefore not a duplicate. Consolidation under Section 33 is a matter of the court's discretion exercised when the parallel cases appear before judgment.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 3131/2562 (2019)
Injured persons who file the same criminal case in two different courts as duplicate suits fall outside Section 33 and are barred, because such duplication is prohibited under the Civil Procedure Code applied through Section 15.
Fourteen injured plaintiffs filed the same criminal case in two different courts as two overlapping suits. The court held this did not meet the criteria of Section 33 and was a prohibited duplicate filing under Civil Procedure Code Section 173(2)(1) applied through Section 15, distinguishing lawful parallel prosecution by different parties from the same party filing twice.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 5461/2534 (1991)
Consolidation under Section 33 is only for the convenience and speed of trial and does not relieve a plaintiff of independent procedural duties such as the duty to appear under Section 166.
Even though the cases of plaintiffs 1 and 2 were consolidated with plaintiff 3's case, the court held consolidation was only for convenience and speed of trial. It did not free plaintiffs 1 and 2 from their duty under Section 166 to appear, so their failure to attend without excuse could still lead to dismissal of their part.
Décisions sélectionnées avec numéros de dossier vérifiés dans la base de données de la Cour suprême. Les versions anglaises sont des traductions éditoriales réalisées par le cabinet à des fins d'étude.
Foire aux questions
Can two versions of the same criminal case be combined?
Yes. Under Section 33, where the prosecutor and the injured person filed the same case, the court may consolidate them into one, before judgment, with the other court's consent if different courts are involved.
Does consolidation merge the plaintiffs' duties?
No. Consolidation under Section 33 is only for convenience of trial. Each plaintiff still has to meet their own duties, such as appearing at the hearing under Section 166.
Is filing the same case twice always allowed?
No. Section 33 covers parallel filings by the prosecutor and the injured person. It does not permit the same party to file the same case twice, which remains a barred duplicate suit.