Article 321: Compoundable liberty offences
Statutory text (Thai original)
ความผิดตามมาตรา ๓๐๙ วรรคแรก มาตรา ๓๑๐ วรรคแรก และมาตรา ๓๑๑ วรรคแรก เป็นความผิดอันยอมความได้
English translation
The offences under Section 309 paragraph one, Section 310 paragraph one and Section 311 paragraph one are compoundable offences.
ThaiLawOnline translation, written from the Thai original and verified
Firm annotation
Section 321 fixes which offences in this Title on offences against liberty may be compounded, and it names three: Section 309 paragraph one (basic coercion), Section 310 paragraph one (basic deprivation of liberty) and Section 311 paragraph one (causing deprivation of liberty by negligence). Everything else in the Title falls outside it. The aggravated paragraphs of Section 309 are excluded, covering a weapon, five or more persons acting together, a document of right, or invoking the authority of a secret society or criminal association. So are the result-aggravated second paragraphs of Sections 310 and 311, which apply where the deprivation of liberty causes death or grievous bodily harm, and the ransom, sexual-purpose, abduction and cross-border offences in Sections 312 to 319. Being compoundable makes the offence a personal offence: a valid settlement by the injured person extinguishes the right to bring the criminal case under the Criminal Procedure Code, and the injured person must complain within three months of learning of the offence and the offender under Section 96. The effect is on whether the case can proceed at all, not merely on the sentence.
Why this matters in practice
Compoundability decides whether a case can be ended by settlement, so the exact paragraph charged is what matters. If the conduct fits basic coercion (Section 309 paragraph one), basic confinement (Section 310 paragraph one) or negligent deprivation of liberty (Section 311 paragraph one), a settlement properly made by the injured person extinguishes the prosecution. Once the facts add a weapon, a group of five or more, or a death or grievous-harm result, the charge moves into a paragraph that cannot be settled and no agreement will stop it. This is why prosecutors and complainants frame the facts to include or exclude aggravating circumstances, and why a defendant should confirm the charged paragraph before paying for a settlement that may not end the case. Note also the three-month complaint deadline under Section 96 that comes with any compoundable offence. For a minor, a settlement made on their behalf by a lawful representative can be valid. Confirm the precise charge through online consultation with a Thai lawyer.
Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section
-
Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 1288/2564 (2021)
Joint unlawful confinement under the first paragraph of Section 310 is a compoundable offence under Section 321, so a valid settlement by the injured party extinguishes the right to prosecute.
The two defendants agreed to pay compensation to the second injured person, the father of the first injured person, who was a minor, and they performed that agreement. The Supreme Court held this amounted to the father settling on the minor's behalf as her lawful representative, so, joint confinement depriving another of bodily liberty under Section 310 paragraph one being compoundable under Section 321, the right to prosecute that offence was extinguished. Being a question of public order, the point was taken by the Court itself and applied to the co-defendant who had not appealed.
-
Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 693/2559 (2016)
Where coercion under Section 309 is committed with a weapon and by five or more persons acting together, it falls under the second paragraph and is not a compoundable offence under Section 321, so a settlement cannot extinguish the prosecution.
The court held that coercion committed with a weapon and by five or more persons acting together is an offence under the second paragraph of Section 309, which is not a personal or compoundable offence under Section 321. The right to prosecute therefore could not be extinguished by settlement under the Criminal Procedure Code, in contrast to the compoundable first paragraph.
-
Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 5521/2537 (1994)
Coercion under the first paragraph of Section 309 is a compoundable offence under Section 321, so where the injured party informs the court of no wish to prosecute, that amounts to settlement and the right to prosecute is extinguished.
The evidence showed only that the defendant had threatened the victim into going with him, which constituted an offence under the first paragraph of Section 309. Because that paragraph is compoundable under Section 321, and the victim had filed a request stating no wish to prosecute on any charge before the case became final, this was treated as settlement of a personal offence and the right to prosecute was extinguished under the Criminal Procedure Code.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Cited in 8 Supreme Court decisions (1962 to 2021)
Décisions de citation sélectionnées
- Decision 22714/2555 (2012)
- Decision 2031/2525 (1982)
- Decision 2279/2521 (1978)
- Decision 609/2505 (1962)
- Decision 693/2559 (2016)
- Decision 5521/2537 (1994)
- Decision 1288/2564 (2021)
- Decision 188/2537 (1994)
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.
Le plus souvent cité aux côtés de
- Article 310 5
- Article 83 4
- Article 91 4
- Article 78 4
- Article 309 4
- Article 288 4
Sections qui apparaissent le plus souvent dans les mêmes jugements que celui-ci. Le chiffre correspond au nombre de décisions.
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
Quelles atteintes à la liberté peuvent être réglées en vertu de l'article 321 ?
Three: basic coercion under Section 309 paragraph one, basic deprivation of liberty under Section 310 paragraph one, and negligently causing deprivation of liberty under Section 311 paragraph one. The aggravated paragraphs and the purpose-based offences in Sections 312 to 319 are not compoundable.
Pourquoi le paragraphe exact de l'article 309 est-il important ?
Seul le premier alinéa est susceptible de transaction. Si une arme ou un groupe de cinq personnes ou plus est impliqué, l'infraction relève du deuxième alinéa, qui ne peut faire l'objet d'un accord mettant fin aux poursuites.
Quel est l'effet d'un règlement valable dans une affaire pouvant faire l'objet d'une transaction ?
Un règlement amiable conclu par la partie lésée met fin à son droit d'engager des poursuites pénales, interrompant ainsi la procédure. Cette décision affecte l'affaire elle-même, et non seulement la peine.
Guides connexes sur ThaiLawOnline
Citer cette section
-
Citation simple
Penal Code, s. 321 (Thailand) -
Citation académique
Penal Code (Thailand), s. 321. ThaiLawOnline, https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-penal-code/section-321/ (accessed 30 août 2026). -
Citation thaïlandaise
ป.อ. มาตรา 321 -
Lien permanent
https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-penal-code/section-321/ -
Intégrer sur votre site
<blockquote cite="https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-penal-code/section-321/"><p>The offences under Section 309 paragraph one, Section 310 paragraph one and Section 311 paragraph one are compoundable offences.</p><footer>Penal Code, s. 321 (Thailand): <a href="https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-penal-code/section-321/">ThaiLawOnline</a></footer></blockquote>
The Thai text is authoritative. The English is an unofficial translation by ThaiLawOnline, free to reuse with attribution.