Section 161 — Correcting or Dismissing a Defective Charge
Statutory text (Thai original)
ถ้าฟ้องไม่ถูกต้องตามกฎหมาย ให้ศาลสั่งโจทก์แก้ฟ้องให้ถูกต้อง หรือยกฟ้องหรือไม่ประทับฟ้องโจทก์มีอำนาจอุทธรณ์คำสั่งเช่นนั้นของศาล
English translation
If the charge is not correct according to law, the court shall order the plaintiff to correct it, or shall dismiss the charge or refuse to accept it. The plaintiff has the right to appeal against such an order of the court.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
This section is the court's remedial power over defective charges that fail the requirements of Section 158. Rather than mandating dismissal, it lets the court order correction, dismiss, or refuse to accept the charge, and it expressly grants the plaintiff a right to appeal. Case law favours correction over outright dismissal for minor, curable defects, particularly where the court has not yet ruled on the merits, and applies the same corrective approach to defective appeal pleadings by reading Section 161 together with Section 215. It is the procedural counterpart to the drafting standard in Section 158.
Why this matters in practice
The practical takeaway is that a technical defect in a charge, such as a missing signature, usually does not end the case: the court will typically order it corrected rather than dismiss. A plaintiff whose charge is dismissed or refused should remember the express right of appeal. For defendants, moving to strike a charge on a purely formal defect often only earns the other side a chance to fix it, so the strategy is best used where the defect goes to substance.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 298/2567 (2024)
An unsigned charge is not correct under Section 158(7), but this is a minor defect that can be cured. Under Section 161 paragraph one the court must order the plaintiff to correct it, especially where the trial court has not yet ruled on the merits, rather than dismiss the case.
The plaintiff had not signed the charge, making it defective under Section 158(7). The Court held this was a minor, correctable error and that under Section 161 paragraph one the court must order the plaintiff to correct it, particularly since the merits had not yet been decided.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 1552/2566 (2023)
Where an appeal pleading is defective because it was drafted and signed by a person not authorised to draft appeals, the appellate court should use its power under Section 161 paragraph one together with Section 215 to order the defect corrected, rather than dismiss the appeal.
The appeal was drafted and signed as drafter by someone not registered as an authorised lawyer. The Court held the appellate court should have ordered the defect corrected under Section 161 paragraph one with Section 215, and disapproved the dismissal of the appeal, remitting the matter for correction within a set time.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Frequently asked questions
What happens if a criminal charge is defective in Thailand?
Under Section 161 the court may order the plaintiff to correct the charge, dismiss it, or refuse to accept it. For minor curable defects, courts usually order correction rather than dismissal.
Can the plaintiff appeal a court order about a defective charge?
Yes. Section 161 expressly gives the plaintiff the right to appeal against the court's order to correct, dismiss, or refuse to accept the charge.