see our annotated Thai Criminal Code<\/a> and the Criminal Procedure Code guide.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nSection-by-Section \u2014 What the Code Actually Says<\/h2>\n\n\n\nSection 276 \u2014 Rape (general)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Anyone who sexually penetrates another person<\/strong> by coercion, force, abuse of incapacity, or impersonation faces 4\u201320 years imprisonment and a fine of THB 80,000\u2013400,000<\/strong>. Aggravation by firearm or explosive raises the floor to 7 years. Multiple offenders raise it further. Marital rape is covered<\/strong>, but specific spouse-context variants are compoundable<\/em> under Section 281 (the victim can withdraw the complaint).<\/p>\n\n\n\nSection 277 \u2014 Statutory rape (under 15)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Sexual penetration of a child under 15<\/strong>, regardless of the child’s consent, is 5\u201320 years and THB 100,000\u2013400,000<\/strong>. If the child is under 13<\/strong>, the floor rises to 7 years and life imprisonment becomes possible. Aggravations (multiple offenders, firearm, in-laws, custodial relationship) raise the maximum to the death penalty<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\nTwo recent Supreme Court (Dika) decisions clarified scope:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n- Dika 5681\/2568 (2025)<\/strong> \u2014 confirmed that “carrying” a firearm during the offence under former Section 277(4) requires the firearm to be “ready for use”<\/strong>, not simply in the bag \u2014 a meaningful narrowing for defence.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Dika 3270\/2568 (2025)<\/strong> \u2014 court of first instance imposed four consecutive life sentences<\/strong> for repeat offences against a child under 15 with a firearm\/knife; the Supreme Court merged them under Section 91(3) \u2014 life is still the result.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
Section 277\/2 escalates the penalty when the victim suffers serious harm (15\u201320 years or life) or dies (life or death penalty).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Section 278 \u2014 Indecent act on person over 15<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Sexual touching, exposure, or non-penetrative sexual contact without consent \u2014 up to 10 years and THB 200,000<\/strong>. The 2019 amendment added a separate aggravated offence at 4\u201320 years for penetration with an object or non-genital body part.<\/p>\n\n\n\nSection 279 \u2014 Indecent act on child under 15<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Indecent act on a child under 15<\/strong> \u2014 up to 10 years and THB 200,000<\/strong>. Under 13<\/strong>: 1\u201310 years and THB 20,000\u2013200,000 (with higher floor). Coercion, force, or weapons during the act trigger Section 280 escalation. Dika 7207\/2567 (2024)<\/strong> confirms appeal-process protections specifically for the under-13 variant.<\/p>\n\n\n\nSection 280 \u2014 Aggravation: serious harm or death<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
If conduct under Sections 278 or 279 causes serious physical or mental harm, the penalty range is 5\u201320 years or life<\/strong>. If it causes death, the penalty is life or death<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\nSection 280\/1 \u2014 Recording the offence (added 2019)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
If the offender records or photographs<\/strong> the act for personal or commercial benefit, the penalty under the underlying section is increased by one-third<\/strong>. Distribution of the recording increases it by one-half<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\nSection 281 \u2014 Compoundable cases<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Several sub-categories are compoundable (can be settled or withdrawn): marital Section 276(1), Section 278 between spouses not in public and without serious harm, etc. This is the basis for many real-world settlements<\/strong> \u2014 but you cannot compound a non-compoundable offence by paying the victim; the public prosecutor still has standing.<\/p>\n\n\n\nSection 282 \u2014 Procuring for sexual gratification<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Procuring a person (male or female) for indecent acts \u2014 1\u201310 years and THB 20,000\u2013200,000<\/strong>, even with consent. Higher floors for victims aged 15\u201318 (3\u201315 years) or under 15 (5\u201320 years).<\/p>\n\n\n\nSection 283 \u2014 Procuring by deceit, threat, force, or undue influence<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
5\u201320 years and up to THB 400,000<\/strong>, escalating for victims 15\u201318 (7\u201320 years or life) and under 15.<\/p>\n\n\n\nSection 283\/2 \u2014 Taking a 15\u201318-year-old for indecent purposes<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Even with consent, up to 5 years or THB 100,000<\/strong>. Under 15: up to 7 years.<\/p>\n\n\n\nSection 284 \u2014 Taking another person for indecent purposes by deceit, threat, force, or undue influence<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
1\u201310 years and THB 20,000\u2013200,000<\/strong>. Compoundable.<\/p>\n\n\n\nSection 285 \u2014 Aggravation: family, custodial relationship<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
If the victim is a lineal ascendant or descendant, sibling, blood relative, pupil under the offender’s care, ward, person in custody, or person under the offender’s authority<\/strong>, the penalty under the relevant section is increased by one-third<\/strong>. The 2024 decision Dika 5524\/2567<\/strong> applied this to a former partner of the child’s mother who continued to act in loco parentis<\/em> even after separation \u2014 the “authority” need not be formal custody.<\/p>\n\n\n\nSection 285\/1 \u2014 Strict liability under age 13<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
For Sections 277, 279, 282(3), 283(3), 283\/2(2), where the victim is under 13<\/strong>, the defendant cannot plead ignorance of the victim’s age. This was added in 2019 to close a defence loophole.<\/p>\n\n\n\nSections 286\u2013287\/1 \u2014 Prostitution, obscenity, child sexual abuse material<\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n- Section 286<\/strong> \u2014 assisting, facilitating, profiting from another’s prostitution: up to 20 years or life.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Section 287<\/strong> \u2014 production, possession-for-distribution, import\/export of obscene material: up to 3 years.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Section 287\/1<\/strong> \u2014 possession of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) for sexual gratification<\/strong>: up to 5 years and THB 100,000; distribution: up to 7 years and THB 140,000.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nHow the Courts Actually Decide These Cases \u2014 A Short Tour of Supreme Court Precedent<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
The black-letter law tells you the range; the Supreme Court (Dika) decisions tell you what really matters at trial.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Dika 4563\/2543 (2000)<\/strong> \u2014 A defendant attempting rape of a victim on a high balcony was held responsible for her resulting death from the fall. The court held the death was a direct and foreseeable consequence<\/strong> of his coercive act. The case is regularly cited for the “foreseeable result” doctrine in sexual-violence prosecutions.<\/p>\n\n\n\nDika 5729\/2556 (2013) & Dika 13262\/2558 (2015)<\/strong> \u2014 Defendants who attempted rape and, believing the victim dead, disposed of the body in a reservoir. The Supreme Court held they lacked the specific intent for murder under Section 288<\/strong> because they did not know the victim was alive when discarding her \u2014 Section 59 paragraph 3 element missing. Notable for defining the limits of “constructive intent” in sexual-violence-plus-disposal cases.<\/p>\n\n\n\nDika 2055\/2568 (2025)<\/strong> \u2014 Section 317 (taking a child under 15 from parents for indecent purposes). The court clarified that “taking” means any act that disrupts parental authority without consent<\/strong> \u2014 physically moving the child is not strictly required.<\/p>\n\n\n\nDika 7207\/2567 (2024)<\/strong> \u2014 Procedural clarification: where the first-instance court refused to accept the defendant’s appeal on related charges without proper notice, the Supreme Court remitted the case. Procedural defence is often the most productive ground<\/strong> in sex-offence appeals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nDika 5524\/2567 (2024)<\/strong> \u2014 Sexual abuse by a man who had previously cohabited with the child’s mother and continued to act in loco parentis<\/em>. The Supreme Court applied Section 285 (family-relationship aggravation)<\/strong> despite the absence of formal custody. Important for foreign step-fathers who may not realise the broader scope of “authority” under Thai law.<\/p>\n\n\n\nDika 975\/2508 (1965) & Dika 619\/2513 (1970)<\/strong> \u2014 Older but still-cited cases where the offender’s conduct moved from sexual offence into homicide under Section 289. The line between Sections 276 and 289 (premeditated murder) is fact-specific.<\/p>\n\n\n\nWe cite Dika decisions frequently because Thai courts often treat them as highly persuasive<\/strong> in sentencing \u2014 the difference between 7 and 12 years often hinges on which precedent your lawyer can cite.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nSpecial Categories<\/h2>\n\n\n\nMarital Rape<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Recognised since the 2007 amendment. Section 276 applies to spouses. Section 281 makes certain marital-context variants compoundable \u2014 meaning the victim can settle and withdraw<\/strong>. In practice, many marital cases resolve via separation and civil agreement rather than criminal trial. See our \u0e04\u0e39\u0e48\u0e21\u0e37\u0e2d\u0e01\u0e32\u0e23\u0e2b\u0e22\u0e48\u0e32\u0e23\u0e49\u0e32\u0e07\u0e43\u0e19\u0e1b\u0e23\u0e30\u0e40\u0e17\u0e28\u0e44\u0e17\u0e22<\/a> \u0e41\u0e25\u0e30 domestic violence in Thailand<\/a> for adjacent remedies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nWorkplace Sexual Harassment<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Two routes: criminal under Section 397<\/strong> (causing public alarm \/ annoyance \u2014 up to 1 month or THB 10,000 fine) and labour-administrative under Section 16 of the Labour Protection Act<\/strong> as amended 2019 (employer’s duty to prevent; civil-style fines and disciplinary obligations). Tort claims for emotional damage are available under Section 420 of the Civil and Commercial Code<\/a>. See Thai labour law overview<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOnline Offences (Image-Based Abuse, Deepfakes, Sextortion)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n