Section 24 — Place of confinement
English translation
Whoever is sentenced to confinement shall be confined in a designated place of confinement other than a prison, a police station, or a place used by an inquiry official to detain the accused. Where the court deems appropriate, the court may order the confinement of the sentenced person at that person's own residence, or at the residence of another person who consents to receive that person; and if the court considers it appropriate to prevent escape, the court may impose any condition.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 24 defines where the punishment of confinement is served and marks it out from imprisonment: the place must not be a prison, a police station, or an inquiry official's detention place. Paragraph two gives the court discretion to allow confinement at the sentenced person's own home or a consenting third party's home, with conditions to prevent escape. The Supreme Court treats home confinement as genuinely discretionary: it is available only where the residence is suitable to the person's type and condition, and courts have refused it where unsuitable. In modern practice, conditions have included electronic monitoring and a stay-at-home order.
Why this matters in practice
If you are sentenced to confinement, this section is what makes home confinement possible, but it is not automatic: you must show the court the residence is suitable, and the court can attach conditions such as electronic monitoring or a curfew. A weak or unsuitable proposed location can lead the court to refuse home confinement. Preparing a concrete, credible plan for where confinement would be served improves the odds of a favorable order.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 4676/2564 (2021)
Under Sections 23 and 24, the court may substitute confinement for imprisonment and order it served at the defendants' own homes, attaching conditions such as electronic monitoring and a stay-at-home order.
The court reduced the sentences to three months and changed imprisonment to confinement, ordering each defendant confined at their own home with an electronic monitoring device and a ban on leaving the residence for three months under Sections 23 and 24. The case illustrates home confinement with modern control conditions.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 4617/2549 (2006)
The discretion under Section 24 paragraph two to order confinement at a person's residence applies only where that place is suitable to the type and condition of the person confined; the court may refuse home confinement when it is not.
After confinement was substituted for imprisonment, the defendant asked to be confined at home. The Court held that although Section 24 paragraph two gives discretion to allow confinement at the person's own or another's residence, it must be a place the court finds suitable to the person's type and condition, and it declined to order home confinement on the facts.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Frequently asked questions
Where is a confinement sentence served?
Under Section 24, confinement is served in a designated place that is not a prison, police station or the detention place used by an inquiry official.
Can confinement be served at home?
Yes, if the court deems it appropriate. Section 24 allows confinement at the person's own home or a consenting person's home, and the court may impose conditions such as electronic monitoring to prevent escape.