Whoever, not having intention to cause death, causes bodily harm to another person and such act results in death, shall be punished with imprisonment of three to fifteen years.
The defendant punched the victim once during an altercation. The victim fell backward, struck his head on the concrete ground, and died from the head injury. The Supreme Court convicted the defendant under Section 290 for causing death by an act intended to cause bodily harm. The Court held that although the defendant intended only to strike the victim (not to kill), the resulting death was a foreseeable consequence of punching someone in a location with a hard surface. Section 290 applies when death results from an act that was intended to cause bodily harm but not death. The defendant need not have foreseen the specific manner of death, only that the act was intended to cause some bodily harm.
The defendant and the deceased engaged in a physical altercation at a social gathering. The defendant struck the deceased repeatedly, causing injuries that led to death. The Supreme Court held that where the evidence shows the defendant intended only to cause bodily harm and not to kill, the act falls under Section 290 (causing death by an act intended to cause bodily harm) rather than Section 288 (murder). The distinction turns on whether the accused harbored specific intent to cause death. Mere participation in a fight, even a violent one, does not automatically establish murderous intent unless surrounding circumstances such as the use of lethal weapons or attacks on vital organs demonstrate otherwise.
The defendant deliberately drove a vehicle to force the victim's motorcycle into a wall and electrical pole in a narrow alley. The victim died immediately and a police officer passenger suffered severe injuries. The Supreme Court determined the defendant possessed intent to kill, as he could foresee the fatal consequences of deliberately causing the collision at high speed. Convicted of intentional murder under Section 288, overturning lower court verdicts that had reduced the charges to negligence or reckless endangerment.
The plaintiff sought punishment for murder under Section 288. The trial court found the defendant's actions constituted appropriate self-defense and dismissed the case. The appellate court disagreed, determining the defendant acted recklessly without intent to kill and convicted under Section 290 read with Section 72. The Supreme Court rejected the plaintiff's cassation petition, holding it raised factual disputes rather than legal ones, which fall outside permissible grounds for cassation under Criminal Procedure Code Section 220.
The plaintiff sought conviction for intentional murder under Section 288. The trial court dismissed for insufficient evidence. The appellate court found that while the defendant did not intend to kill, the victim died from the defendant's physical assault (striking and kicking). The Supreme Court upheld conviction under Section 290 (unintentional killing through assault) rather than Section 288, establishing the distinction between intent to harm and intent to kill in physical altercation cases.
Disclaimer: The English translation is unofficial and for informational purposes only. The authoritative text is in Thai as published in the Royal Thai Government Gazette (Ratchakitchanubeksa).ข้อสงวนสิทธิ์: คำแปลภาษาอังกฤษเป็นคำแปลอย่างไม่เป็นทางการ เพื่อวัตถุประสงค์ในการให้ข้อมูลเท่านั้น ข้อความที่เป็นทางการเป็นภาษาไทยตามที่ประกาศในราชกิจจานุเบกษา