Section 181: Application of Sections 139 and 166 to Trial
Statutory text (Thai original)
ให้นำบทบัญญัติในมาตรา ๑๓๙ และ ๑๖๖ มาบังคับแก่การพิจารณาโดยอนุโลม
English translation
The provisions of sections 139 and 166 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the trial.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified. Always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 181 is a bridging provision in Title 2 (Trial) that carries sections 139 and 166 into the trial stage by mutatis mutandis application. Section 166, in particular, governs the effect of a prosecutor's failure to appear on the appointed date and allows the court to dismiss the charge. In practice, the Supreme Court has held that this consequence attaches only to genuine trial or evidence-taking dates, so a prosecutor's absence from, for example, a mediation appointment that is not a hearing does not justify dismissal. The reach of the section is thus tied precisely to what kind of appointment the prosecutor missed.
Why this matters in practice
For a private prosecutor, this is a trap to avoid: through Sections 181 and 166, failing to appear on a genuine hearing or evidence date can get your case dismissed. The saving point, confirmed by the Supreme Court, is that the dismissal rule bites only on real hearing dates, not on ancillary appointments like a mediation meeting. If you bring a private criminal prosecution, calendar every hearing carefully and arrange representation; discuss the risks first in an online consultation with a Thai lawyer.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 3522/2563 (2020)
A prosecutor's absence from a preliminary or mediation appointment that is not an evidence-examination or hearing date does not meet the requirement of Section 166 paragraph one together with Section 181, so the court cannot dismiss the charge for it.
The trial court dismissed the charge because the prosecutor missed a date set for reconciliation. The Supreme Court held that because this was not an evidence-examination or hearing date, it did not fall under Section 166 paragraph one with Section 181, so the dismissal was unlawful and was rightly set aside by the appellate court.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 9280/2551 (2008)
Where the private prosecutor fails to appear on a scheduled date to continue examining his own testimony, the court may dismiss the charge under Section 166 paragraph one together with Section 181.
After the private prosecutor had begun testifying over two hearing dates, he failed to appear at the next scheduled examination date. The trial court dismissed the charge under Section 166 paragraph one together with Section 181, the consequence of a prosecutor's non-appearance carried into the trial stage.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Cited in 56 Supreme Court decisions (1945 to 2023)
Selected citing decisions
- Decision 3522/2563 (2020)
- Decision 9280/2551 (2008)
- Decision 8914/2551 (2008)
- Decision 3736/2551 (2008)
- Decision 5985/2550 (2007)
- Decision 1847/2550 (2007)
- Decision 724/2548 (2005)
- Decision 7178/2547 (2004)
This list is selected automatically, weighted towards judgments that turn on this section rather than ones that merely recite it when passing sentence. It has not yet been reviewed by the firm.
Most often cited alongside
- Section 166 55
- Thai Penal Code s. 91 14
- Thai Penal Code s. 83 10
- Thai Penal Code s. 90 5
- Section 15 4
- Thai Penal Code s. 326 4
Sections that appear in the same judgments as this one most often. The figure is the number of decisions.
Counted across the firm's corpus of 83,652 Supreme Court decisions, 1921 to 2026. The count is complete; the stated year range trims rare outliers so it describes where the citations actually sit. These figures are computed by us and are not official court statistics. How we count these, and what we measured
Frequently asked questions
What happens if the prosecutor does not appear at trial?
The charge can be dismissed. Section 181 applies Section 166 to the trial, so a prosecutor's absence on a genuine hearing or evidence date allows the court to dismiss the case.
Does missing a mediation date allow dismissal under Section 181?
No. The Supreme Court has held the dismissal rule under Sections 166 and 181 applies only to genuine hearing or evidence dates, not to a mediation appointment that is not a hearing.
Related guides on ThaiLawOnline
Cite this section
-
Plain citation
Criminal Procedure Code, s. 181 (Thailand) -
Academic citation
Criminal Procedure Code (Thailand), s. 181. ThaiLawOnline, https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-criminal-procedure-code/section-181/ (accessed 11 August 2026). -
Thai citation
ป.วิ.อ. มาตรา 181 -
Permalink
https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-criminal-procedure-code/section-181/ -
Embed on your site
<blockquote cite="https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-criminal-procedure-code/section-181/"><p>The provisions of sections 139 and 166 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the trial.</p><footer>Criminal Procedure Code, s. 181 (Thailand) — <a href="https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-criminal-procedure-code/section-181/">ThaiLawOnline</a></footer></blockquote>
The Thai text is authoritative. The English is an unofficial translation by ThaiLawOnline, free to reuse with attribution.