Section 54 — Order of increase and reduction
English translation
In calculating the increase or reduction of the punishment to be imposed, the court shall first fix the punishment to be imposed on the defendant and then increase or reduce it. If there is both an increase and a reduction of punishment, the increase shall be made first and then the reduction shall be made from the result already increased. If the portion increased is equal to or greater than the portion reduced, the court may make neither the increase nor the reduction.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 54 sets the method and sequence for adjusting a sentence. The court must first fix the base punishment to be imposed, and only then apply any increase and any reduction. Where both apply, the order is mandatory: increase first, then reduce from the already increased figure. As a simplifying rule, if the portion to be increased is equal to or greater than the portion to be reduced, the court may decline to do either. This procedural discipline links the enhancement provisions (such as Section 92) with the mitigation provisions (such as Section 78), and the courts treat an error in this sequence as a sentencing defect they may correct.
Why this matters in practice
The sequence matters to the final number, because increasing first and then reducing from the raised figure produces a different result than doing it the other way. In practice, where a recidivism increase and a mitigation reduction are the same proportion, courts often apply neither, leaving the base term intact. Because these arithmetic steps are frequently the subject of appeals, defendants should check that the judgment fixed the base penalty first and applied increase before reduction.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 3704/2567 (2024)
Under Section 54 the court must first fix the punishment to be imposed and only then apply the increase; increasing before fixing the base term is incorrect and may be revised.
The Supreme Court corrected the sentencing method, holding that under Section 54 the trial court had to fix the punishment first and then increase it by one-half, and revised the judgment to follow that order.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 802/2567 (2024)
Under Section 54, in calculating a reduction the court first fixes the punishment, then calculates the portion to be reduced and deducts it from the fixed term.
The Supreme Court en banc explained that under Section 54 the punishment is fixed first, then the reduction portion is calculated and deducted, so a one-third reduction of a four-year term is one year four months, leaving two years eight months.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 5873/2567 (2024)
Under Section 54, where the portion to be increased equals the portion to be reduced, the court may make neither the increase nor the reduction.
For attempted murder the court set imprisonment, faced a one-third recidivism increase and a one-third mitigation reduction, and because the increase equaled the reduction it applied neither under Section 54.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Frequently asked questions
In what order does a Thai court increase and reduce punishment?
Under Section 54 the court first fixes the punishment, then increases it, then reduces from the increased figure. The increase always comes before the reduction.
What if the increase and the reduction are the same size?
Under Section 54, if the portion to be increased is equal to or greater than the portion to be reduced, the court may make neither the increase nor the reduction.