Section 71: Property offences between spouses and close relatives
Statutory text (Thai original)
ความผิดตามที่บัญญัติไว้ในมาตรา ๓๓๔ ถึงมาตรา ๓๓๖ วรรคแรก และมาตรา ๓๔๑ ถึงมาตรา ๓๖๔ นั้น ถ้าเป็นการกระทำที่สามีกระทำต่อภริยา หรือภริยากระทำต่อสามี ผู้กระทำไม่ต้องรับโทษ ความผิดดังระบุมานี้ ถ้าเป็นการกระทำที่ผู้บุพการีกระทำต่อผู้สืบสันดาน ผู้สืบสันดานกระทำต่อผู้บุพการี หรือพี่หรือน้องร่วมบิดามารดาเดียวกันกระทำต่อกัน แม้กฎหมายมิได้บัญญัติให้เป็นความผิดอันยอมความได้ ก็ให้เป็นความผิดอันยอมความได้ และนอกจากนั้น ศาลจะลงโทษน้อยกว่าที่กฎหมายกำหนดไว้สำหรับความผิดนั้นเพียงใดก็ได้
English translation
The offences provided in Section 334 to Section 336 paragraph one, and in Section 341 to Section 364, if committed by a husband against his wife or by a wife against her husband, are not punishable.
Where any of the offences so specified is committed by an ascendant against a descendant, by a descendant against an ascendant, or between a brother or sister of the same parents, then, even though the law does not provide that offence to be a compoundable offence, it shall be a compoundable offence; and in addition, the court may impose a punishment less than that provided by law for that offence, to any extent.
ThaiLawOnline translation, written from the Thai original and verified
Firm annotation
Section 71 provides special treatment for a defined list of property offences (Sections 334 to 336 paragraph one, 341 to 344, 352 to 354, 357, and 358 to 360) when committed within the family. Paragraph one grants a complete exemption from punishment where the offence is between husband and wife. Paragraph two, for offences against an ascendant, descendant, or full sibling, gives the court discretion to reduce the penalty below the statutory minimum to any extent and, importantly, converts the offence into a compoundable one even where the underlying provision would otherwise be non-compoundable. The list is exhaustive, so aggravating provisions outside it (such as Section 336 bis, which only increases the penalty for theft) do not add offences but ride on the listed base offence. The provision reflects a policy of keeping intra-family property disputes settleable and lightly punished.
Why this matters in practice
Section 71 matters most for its compoundability effect: for a listed property offence committed by a family member against an ascendant, descendant, or full sibling, the case becomes one the complainant can settle and withdraw, even where theft would normally be non-compoundable. This gives real leverage in family property disputes, since a settlement can end the prosecution. Between spouses, the exemption is complete and no punishment follows. For a defendant, establishing the qualifying relationship is the key fact, and an aggravated label such as Section 336 bis does not remove the section's benefit because it only enhances the listed base offence. Where a family theft or breach-of-trust case can be resolved by agreement, early legal advice on settlement is well worth taking.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 3681/2568 (2025)
Theft committed between full siblings falls under Section 71 paragraph two, allowing the court to impose a punishment below the statutory level.
The defendant was a full sibling of the victim and was charged with theft under Sections 335 and 336 bis. Because the act was between full siblings under Section 71 paragraph two, the Court found it appropriate to impose a punishment below the statutory level and reduced the sentence.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 1543/2568 (2025)
Criminal breach of trust committed against full siblings falls under Section 71 paragraph two, giving the court discretion to reduce the punishment below the statutory level.
The defendant committed an offence under Sections 353 and 354 against the two plaintiffs, who were his full siblings. The Court noted that Section 71 paragraph two gives it discretion to impose a punishment below the statutory level, indicating the legislature treats such intra-family conduct as less serious.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 1750/2568 (2025)
Where a descendant commits a listed property offence against an ascendant, Section 71 paragraph two makes it compoundable even if the base offence is otherwise non-compoundable, and an aggravating provision such as Section 336 bis does not change this.
The defendant, a child of the victim, was charged with theft under Section 335 paragraph one. The Court held that under Section 71 paragraph two the offence was compoundable even though not otherwise so, and that Section 336 bis merely aggravates the penalty for Section 335 and does not remove that effect.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Cited in 22 Supreme Court decisions (1963 to 2025)
Selected citing decisions
- Decision 4925/2566 (2023)
- Decision 1933/2564 (2021)
- Decision 2887/2563 (2020)
- Decision 1579-1580/2558 (2015)
- Decision 3756-3757/2550 (2007)
- Decision 552/2542 (1999)
- Decision 4419/2528 (1985)
- Decision 221/2528 (1985)
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 78 13
- Section 335 12
- Section 91 10
- Thai CrPC s. 39 8
- Section 83 8
- Section 336/2 6
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
Is theft between husband and wife a crime in Thailand?
For the property offences listed in Section 71, an act between husband and wife carries no punishment. The doer is exempt, though the list is limited to specific offences such as theft, cheating, and criminal breach of trust.
Does Section 71 make theft against a parent compoundable?
Yes. Where a descendant commits a listed property offence against an ascendant, or between full siblings, Section 71 paragraph two makes it a compoundable offence and lets the court reduce the punishment below the statutory level.
Does an aggravating provision like Section 336 bis remove the Section 71 benefit?
No. Section 336 bis only increases the penalty for theft under Section 335; it is not a separate offence, so it rides on the listed base offence and does not defeat the compoundability created by Section 71 paragraph two.
Related guides on ThaiLawOnline
Cite this section
-
Plain citation
Penal Code, s. 71 (Thailand) -
Academic citation
Penal Code (Thailand), s. 71. ThaiLawOnline, https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-penal-code/section-71/ (accessed 17 August 2026). -
Thai citation
ป.อ. มาตรา 71 -
Permalink
https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-penal-code/section-71/ -
Embed on your site
<blockquote cite="https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-penal-code/section-71/"><p>The offences provided in Section 334 to Section 336 paragraph one, and in Section 341 to Section 364, if committed by a husband against his wife or by a wife against her husband, are not punishable. Where any of the offences so specified is committed…</p><footer>Penal Code, s. 71 (Thailand) — <a href="https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-penal-code/section-71/">ThaiLawOnline</a></footer></blockquote>
The Thai text is authoritative. The English is an unofficial translation by ThaiLawOnline, free to reuse with attribution.