Section 147 — Embezzlement by an official
English translation
Whoever, being an official having the duty to buy, make, manage or maintain any property, dishonestly misappropriates that property for himself or for another, or dishonestly allows another person to take that property away, shall be punished with imprisonment from five to twenty years or imprisonment for life, and a fine from one hundred thousand to four hundred thousand baht.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 147 is the official-embezzlement (peculation) offence and opens the Chapter on Malfeasance in Office. Its elements are (1) being an official (2) with the duty to buy, make, manage or maintain the property, (3) dishonestly misappropriating it for oneself or another, or dishonestly allowing another to take it. The duty over the property is the core element that separates this from ordinary embezzlement under Section 352; where a defendant handled the property as a private person rather than by virtue of official duty, the conduct falls under Section 352, which carries a far lighter penalty. Each separate misappropriation is generally a separate offence, so amounts and counts drive very long aggregate sentences.
Why this matters in practice
This is one of the most serious corruption offences: the mandatory minimum is five years and a fine, and it is a non-compoundable public offence, so repaying the money does not extinguish liability, though it may mitigate the sentence. Cases are typically investigated by the National Anti-Corruption Commission and tried in the anti-corruption courts. A key line of defence is that the accused had no official duty over the specific property, which can bring the case down to ordinary embezzlement under Section 352. Given the life-imprisonment ceiling and multiple-count exposure, early advice matters; a online consultation with a Thai lawyer can map the charges before charges are formalized.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 2324/2567 (2024)
Where the indictment sets out facts amounting to the elements of ordinary embezzlement under Section 352, and the evidence shows the defendant took the property as a private person rather than by official duty, the court may convict under Section 352 even though the charge was framed under Section 147.
The prosecution charged the official under Sections 147 and 157. The Supreme Court noted that because the facts pleaded also covered the elements of ordinary embezzlement under Section 352, the court had power to convict under Section 352 where the conduct was that of a private person rather than an exercise of official duty.
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 is the difference between Section 147 and ordinary embezzlement?
Section 147 applies only when the offender is an official with a duty over the property; if he acted as a private person, it is ordinary embezzlement under Section 352, with a much lighter penalty.
Does returning the money end liability under Section 147?
No. It is a non-compoundable public offence, so repayment does not extinguish the crime, though it may reduce the sentence.
What is the penalty for official embezzlement?
Imprisonment of five to twenty years or life, together with a fine of 100,000 to 400,000 baht.