Section 191 — Freeing a person from custody
English translation
Whoever, by any means, causes a person held in confinement under the authority of a court, a public prosecutor, an inquiry official, or an official having power to investigate criminal cases, to be released from confinement, shall be liable to imprisonment not exceeding five years, or a fine not exceeding one hundred thousand baht, or both.
If the person released from confinement is a person sentenced by any court to death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment of fifteen years or more, or where there are three or more such persons, the offender shall be liable to imprisonment from six months to seven years and a fine from ten thousand baht to one hundred and forty thousand baht.
If the offense under this section is committed by using violence, by threatening to use violence, or by having or using a firearm or an explosive, the offender shall be liable to a penalty heavier by one half than that provided in the two preceding paragraphs.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
The elements are: (1) a person lawfully held in confinement by one of the listed authorities; and (2) an act by any means that causes that person to be released from confinement. Unlike Section 190 (self-escape), Section 191 targets a third party who springs the detainee. Paragraph two aggravates by the seriousness of the freed person's sentence (death, life, or 15 years or more) or by numbers (three or more), and paragraph three adds a one-half increase for violence, threats, firearms, or explosives. A threshold condition is that the person was actually in lawful custody; if there was no valid confinement, the offense is not made out. Section 192 addresses subsequently harboring an escapee.
Why this matters in practice
This is a serious charge because the base tier already reaches five years and rises sharply with the freed person's sentence or with any weapon. A recurring defense is that the person was never actually in lawful custody: if the detainee had not yet been secured under an official's control, freeing or aiding them does not complete the offense. Any firearm or explosive raises every tier by one half, so weapon involvement is the key aggravating fact to assess. Anyone accused of helping a detainee escape should seek criminal law advice in Thailand early.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 7322/2557 (2014)
Section 191 requires that the person was actually held in lawful custody; where officers had not yet been able to arrest and secure the person, the defendant's act does not constitute the offense.
Because officers had not yet succeeded in arresting the person, he was not in the custody of an official with investigative power, so the defendant's conduct did not amount to an offense under Section 191, even though it was violence toward an official under Section 138 paragraph two.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 5681/2568 (2025)
The aggravated firearm paragraph (Section 191 paragraph three) reflects a legislative policy against firearm involvement; a firearm carried and ready for use in committing the offense triggers the aggravation even if not fired.
Discussing firearm aggravation across several provisions, the court cited Section 191 paragraph three as an example, explaining that a firearm close at hand and ready to be used suffices given the serious danger firearms present.
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 190 and Section 191?
Section 190 punishes the detainee who escapes on their own; Section 191 punishes a third party who frees a person held in lawful custody. Section 191 carries a higher base penalty, up to five years.
Is it a defense that the person was not properly under arrest?
Yes. Section 191 requires that the person was actually held in lawful custody. If the person had not been secured under an official's control, freeing or aiding them does not constitute the offense.