Article 365: Aggravated trespass
Statutory text (Thai original)
ถ้าการกระทำความผิดตามมาตรา ๓๖๒ มาตรา ๓๖๓ หรือมาตรา ๓๖๔ ได้กระทำ (๑) โดยใช้กำลังประทุษร้าย หรือขู่เข็ญว่าจะใช้กำลังประทุษร้าย (๒) โดยมีอาวุธหรือโดยร่วมกระทำความผิดด้วยกันตั้งแต่สองคนขึ้นไป หรือ (๓) ในเวลากลางคืน ผู้กระทำต้องระวางโทษจำคุกไม่เกินห้าปี หรือปรับไม่เกินหนึ่งแสนบาท หรือทั้งจำทั้งปรับ หมายเหตุ: [อัตราโทษ แก้ไขเพิ่มเติมโดยมาตรา ๔ แห่งพระราชบัญญัติแก้ไขเพิ่มเติมประมวลกฎหมายอาญา (ฉบับที่ ๒๖) พ.ศ. ๒๕๖๐]
English translation
If the offence under Section 362, Section 363 or Section 364 is committed (1) by using force or threatening to use force; (2) by carrying a weapon or by two or more persons jointly committing the offence; (3) at night, the offender shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding five years or a fine not exceeding one hundred thousand baht, or both.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified. Always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
This is the aggravated form of trespass: it does not create a fresh offence but attaches a heavier penalty to the base trespass provisions (Sections 362, 363 and 364) whenever any of three circumstances is present, namely use or threat of force, carrying a weapon or acting with two or more persons, or commission at night. The circumstances are alternative, so proof of any one is enough to elevate the offence. In practice force applied in immediate and continuous connection with an ongoing trespass is treated as inseparable from it, so the whole conduct falls under Section 365(1) rather than being split into separate offences.
Why this matters in practice
Aggravated trespass carries up to five years' imprisonment, a real custodial exposure, and it commonly appears alongside charges such as assault, criminal damage or firearms offences arising from the same incident. On settlement the position is the opposite of the rest of the Chapter: Section 366 makes the trespass offences compoundable OTHER THAN the offence under Section 365, so an aggravated trespass cannot be settled, a withdrawal of the complaint does not end it, and the prosecution continues whatever the occupier wishes. The three-month complaint window in Section 96 does not apply to it either, because that rule is confined to compoundable offences. Where the same incident also yields a base trespass under Sections 362 to 364, a settlement extinguishes only those counts. A frequent defence is to contest the aggravating factor itself, for example that no weapon was carried or that only one person entered, which if accepted drops the case back to the lighter base provision and, with it, back into the compoundable class. Encroaching on another's possession of land can qualify even without physically standing on it.
Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section
-
Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 3817/2568 (2025)
Intruding upon another's control over immovable property so as to disturb their peaceful possession amounts to trespass, and where committed jointly by two or more persons it is aggravated under Section 365(2) read with Section 362, even if the offenders did not physically enter the land.
The two defendants placed structures and a barbed-wire fence blocking access to the plaintiff's immovable property. The Court held this intruded on the plaintiff's possession and disturbed peaceful enjoyment, constituting joint aggravated trespass under Section 365(2) with Section 362.
-
Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 2030/2568 (2025)
Where trespass into a dwelling is immediately and continuously followed by force while the trespass is still ongoing, the acts are inseparable and constitute aggravated trespass by force under Section 365(1).
The three defendants trespassed into another's dwelling and used force in an unbroken continuation of the trespass. The Court treated the conduct as one inseparable course of action amounting to aggravated trespass by force under Section 365(1).
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Cited in 563 Supreme Court decisions (1961 to 2025)
Décisions de citation sélectionnées
- Décision 3817/2568 (2025)
- Décision 8583/2568 (2025)
- Décision 1689/2566 (2023)
- Decision 1457/2563 (2020)
- Decision 7574/2559 (2016)
- Decision 15933/2557 (2014)
- Decision 14704/2557 (2014)
- Decision 10542/2556 (2013)
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 362 356
- Article 364 287
- Article 83 270
- Article 90 209
- Article 91 206
- Article 78 149
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
Qu’est-ce qui rend l’intrusion aggravée en vertu de l’article 365 ?
L'une des trois circonstances suivantes : utiliser ou menacer d'utiliser la force, porter une arme ou agir avec deux personnes ou plus, ou commettre l'intrusion de nuit.
L'intrusion aggravée est-elle toujours susceptible de faire l'objet d'une transaction pénale ?
No, and this is the one trespass offence that is not. Section 366 makes the offences in the Chapter compoundable OTHER THAN the offence under Section 365, so a settlement with the occupier does not end an aggravated trespass charge and a withdrawal of the complaint does not extinguish the right to prosecute. The three-month complaint period in Section 96 does not apply to it either, since that rule is for compoundable offences. Settlement can still dispose of a base trespass charge under Sections 362 to 364 arising from the same incident.
Puis-je être coupable d'intrusion sans entrer physiquement sur le terrain ?
Oui. La Cour suprême a statué que le fait de s'immiscer dans la possession d'un bien immobilier appartenant à autrui, de manière à perturber sa jouissance paisible, peut constituer une violation de domicile au sens des articles 365 et 362, même sans y avoir mis les pieds.
Guides connexes sur ThaiLawOnline
Citer cette section
-
Citation simple
Penal Code, s. 365 (Thailand) -
Citation académique
Penal Code (Thailand), s. 365. ThaiLawOnline, https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-penal-code/section-365/ (accessed 30 août 2026). -
Citation thaïlandaise
ป.อ. มาตรา 365 -
Lien permanent
https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-penal-code/section-365/ -
Intégrer sur votre site
<blockquote cite="https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-penal-code/section-365/"><p>If the offence under Section 362, Section 363 or Section 364 is committed (1) by using force or threatening to use force; (2) by carrying a weapon or by two or more persons jointly committing the offence; (3) at night, the offender shall be punished…</p><footer>Penal Code, s. 365 (Thailand): <a href="https://www.thailawonline.com/fr/thai-penal-code/section-365/">ThaiLawOnline</a></footer></blockquote>
The Thai text is authoritative. The English is an unofficial translation by ThaiLawOnline, free to reuse with attribution.