Section 162: Official false certification in documents
Statutory text (Thai original)
ผู้ใดเป็นเจ้าพนักงาน มีหน้าที่ทำเอกสาร รับเอกสารหรือกรอกข้อความลงในเอกสาร กระทำการดังต่อไปนี้ในการปฏิบัติการตามหน้าที่ (๑) รับรองเป็นหลักฐานว่า ตนได้กระทำการอย่างใดขึ้น หรือว่าการอย่างใดได้กระทำต่อหน้าตนอันเป็นความเท็จ (๒) รับรองเป็นหลักฐานว่า ได้มีการแจ้งซึ่งข้อความอันมิได้มีการแจ้ง (๓) ละเว้นไม่จดข้อความซึ่งตนมีหน้าที่ต้องรับจด หรือจดเปลี่ยนแปลงข้อความเช่นว่านั้น หรือ (๔) รับรองเป็นหลักฐานซึ่งข้อเท็จจริงอันเอกสารนั้น มุ่งพิสูจน์ความจริงอันเป็นความเท็จ ต้องระวางโทษจำคุกไม่เกินเจ็ดปี และปรับไม่เกินหนึ่งแสนสี่หมื่นบาท หมายเหตุ: [อัตราโทษ แก้ไขเพิ่มเติมโดยมาตรา ๔ แห่งพระราชบัญญัติแก้ไขเพิ่มเติมประมวลกฎหมายอาญา (ฉบับที่ ๒๖) พ.ศ. ๒๕๖๐]
English translation
Whoever, being an official having the duty to make documents, receive documents or fill in statements in documents, does any of the following acts in the performance of duty:
(1) falsely certifies as evidence that they have done any act, or that any act has been done in their presence;
(2) certifies as evidence that a statement has been given when no such statement was given;
(3) omits to record a statement that they have the duty to record, or records a change to such a statement; or
(4) falsely certifies as evidence a fact that the document is intended to prove,
shall be liable to imprisonment not exceeding seven years and a fine not exceeding one hundred and forty 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 162 targets false certification in official documents, as distinct from physically forging one under Section 161. Its elements are: (1) the actor is an official with a duty to make, receive or complete documents; and (2) in performing that duty they commit one of the four listed acts, all of which turn on certifying or recording something untrue, or omitting a required entry. The gravamen is the falsity of the content the officer records or certifies, not the alteration of the document's form. It is very frequently charged with Section 157, and where the same conduct offends several provisions the court sentences under the heaviest, which is usually Section 157. Charges are commonly framed by reference to specific limbs, most often (1) and (4).
Why this matters in practice
Maximum exposure is seven years plus a mandatory fine, and as a malfeasance offence it cannot be settled privately. A recurring defence question is whether the certified fact was actually false and whether the officer had the duty to record it: the Supreme Court has held, for example, that merely approving a loan and payment for a project that was never carried out does not by itself amount to a false certification under limbs (1) and (4), because those limbs require a false statement of fact within the document. Since these counts almost always travel with Section 157, defence strategy centres on breaking the factual link between the officer's entry and any dishonesty. Early legal advice is important once an anti-corruption inquiry is opened.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 2483/2565 (2022)
Section 162 applies only to an official who has the duty to make documents, to receive documents, or to fill in statements in documents. The chief executive of a tambon administrative organisation, whose duties under sections 59 and 60 of the Tambon Council and Tambon Administrative Organisation Act B.E. 2537 are to set policy and to order, permit and approve, has no such duty. So even approving a loan under a borrowing agreement and approving payment on a withdrawal request for a project never carried out is not an offence under Section 162 (1) and (4).
The first defendant was the chief executive of the Wiang Nuea tambon administrative organisation. He approved a loan under a borrowing agreement and approved payment on a withdrawal request for a project that was never carried out. The Supreme Court held Section 162 (1) and (4) did not apply to him at all: his statutory duties were to set policy and to order, permit and approve, and did not include making, receiving or filling in documents, which is the office the section requires.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Cited in 176 Supreme Court decisions (1957 to 2026)
Selected citing decisions
- Decision 621/2568 (2025)
- Decision 198/2564 (2021)
- Decision 5263/2561 (2018)
- Decision 2322-2323/2561 (2018)
- Decision 1033/2560 (2017)
- Decision 10742/2559 (2016)
- Decision 8010/2556 (2013)
- Decision 6608-6609/2556 (2013)
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 157 137
- Section 83 102
- Section 91 102
- Section 90 72
- Section 86 58
- Section 161 56
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 is the difference between Section 161 and Section 162?
Section 161 punishes physically forging a document, while Section 162 punishes an official who records or certifies false content in a document. The wrongdoing in 162 is the false content, not the altered form.
Does approving a payment for an unperformed project breach Section 162?
The Supreme Court has held that merely approving a loan and payment for a project that was never carried out does not by itself amount to false certification under limbs (1) and (4), which require a false statement of fact in the document.
Related guides on ThaiLawOnline
Cite this section
-
Plain citation
Penal Code, s. 162 (Thailand) -
Academic citation
Penal Code (Thailand), s. 162. ThaiLawOnline, https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-penal-code/section-162/ (accessed 17 August 2026). -
Thai citation
ป.อ. มาตรา 162 -
Permalink
https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-penal-code/section-162/ -
Embed on your site
<blockquote cite="https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-penal-code/section-162/"><p>Whoever, being an official having the duty to make documents, receive documents or fill in statements in documents, does any of the following acts in the performance of duty: (1) falsely certifies as evidence that they have done any act, or that any act has…</p><footer>Penal Code, s. 162 (Thailand) — <a href="https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-penal-code/section-162/">ThaiLawOnline</a></footer></blockquote>
The Thai text is authoritative. The English is an unofficial translation by ThaiLawOnline, free to reuse with attribution.