Section 269/4 — Using or holding a forged card
English translation
Whoever uses or possesses for use an electronic card forged under Section 269/2 or Section 269/3 shall be liable to the same penalty as the offender under Section 269/2 or Section 269/3, as the case may be.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 269/4 is the card analogue of Section 268 for documents. It criminalises two acts: using a forged electronic card, and possessing one for the purpose of use. It has no penalty scale of its own but borrows the penalty of the section under which the card was forged, so a card forged under Section 269/3 carries the three-to-ten-year range. Mere possession qualifies where the intent to use is present, which broadens liability beyond actual use. As with document forgery and use, when the same person forges and then uses the card the acts may be treated as connected, but possession or use of multiple cards can be charged as separate counts.
Why this matters in practice
The practical reach of Section 269/4 is that possession with intent to use is enough; a defendant found holding cloned cards need not have completed a transaction to be liable. Because the penalty mirrors the underlying forgery section, exposure can be as high as ten years where the cards are payment cards under Section 269/3. Multi-count prosecutions with theft under Section 334 are the norm, and each card or use can form a separate count. A common defence is the absence of intent to use, for example where cards were held for a lawful reason or without knowledge that they were forged. For related material see fraud and scam laws in Thailand.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 2490/2558 (2015)
Possessing forged payment cards for use, where each card is intended to be used separately in a manner likely to cause damage, constitutes several distinct offences under Section 269/4, one per card.
Charged under Sections 269/1, 269/2, 269/4, and 269/7, the defendants were held to have committed five counts of jointly possessing electronic cards for use, because each forged card was intended for separate use.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 1517/2564 (2021)
Using or possessing for use a forged payment card under Section 269/4 supports conviction alongside document forgery and theft, since the card is treated as both an electronic card and a right document.
In a multi-count prosecution under Sections 264, 265, 266, 269/1, 269/2, 269/4, and 269/7 with theft under Section 334, the defendant was convicted under Section 269/4 paragraph one read with Section 269/7 among several counts.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Frequently asked questions
Is holding a forged card a crime even if I never used it?
Yes. Section 269/4 punishes possessing a forged electronic card for the purpose of use, so liability can arise from possession with intent to use, even without a completed transaction.
What penalty applies under Section 269/4?
The penalty equals that of the section under which the card was forged: one to five years if forged under Section 269/2, or three to ten years if it is a payment card forged under Section 269/3.