Article 43: Prosecutor's claim for stolen property or value

Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section

1. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 4380/2568 (2025)

   The offences in Section 43 are an exhaustive list; malicious mischief is not among them, so the prosecutor cannot claim return or value of property under Section 43 for that charge.

   The prosecutor charged only joint malicious mischief and made no restitution request in the prayer. The Court held that malicious mischief is not an offence listed in Section 43, so there was no basis for the prosecutor to claim return or value of the property, and the injured co-plaintiff had also not filed a compensation motion under Section 44/1.

2. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 2289/2568 (2025)

   In a theft case the injured person's right to reclaim the property or its value under Section 43 can be pursued through the connected civil channels of Sections 44 and 44/1.

   The Court set out that Section 43 gives the theft victim a right to reclaim the stolen property or its value, that Section 44 allows the prosecutor to include the claim or file it during the trial, and that Section 44/1 allows the injured person to seek compensation. It applied this framework to a claim to recover a stolen gold ring or its value.

3. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 3399/2568 (2025)

   Where restitution is claimed under Section 43 within a fraud prosecution, no separate court-fee order is required for the civil part.

   The defendant was convicted of joint fraud and ordered to return 1,100,000 baht still owed to the victim. The Court noted that, because the claim was made under Section 43, no order on court fees for the civil part was needed.

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