Section 94 — Offences excluded from penalty increase
English translation
An offence committed by negligence, a petty offence, and an offence committed by the offender while under eighteen years of age, whether it is the earlier offence or the later offence, shall not be regarded as an offence for the purpose of increasing punishment under the provisions of this Chapter.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 94 is the limiting rule for the recidivism chapter, qualifying both Section 92 (one-third increase) and Section 93 (one-half increase). It removes three categories from the enhancement calculus regardless of whether they are the prior or the current offence: negligent offences, petty offences, and offences committed while under eighteen. The rationale is that these offences reflect neither the deliberate persistence nor the mature culpability that the enhancement targets. In practice this means a prior conviction that looks like a basis for increase must first be tested against Section 94, and a prior record made up only of excluded offences cannot support any increase at all. It does not affect conviction, only the enhancement of punishment.
Why this matters in practice
Section 94 is a direct defence to an enhancement request: if the prior conviction the prosecution relies on was a negligent offence, a petty offence, or an offence you committed before turning eighteen, it cannot be used to raise your sentence under Section 92 or 93. It is worth checking the exact nature and your age at the time of any prior offence the prosecution cites, because an improper enhancement is a correctable error even on appeal. The exclusion is about punishment only, so the prior record may still appear for other purposes. If a prior conviction is being used against you, a lawyer can test whether Section 94 blocks the increase; you can consult a Thai lawyer online.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 8970/2561 (2018)
An offence committed while the defendant was under eighteen cannot be used to increase punishment under Section 94, so an enhancement based on such a prior offence is unlawful.
The prior conviction the prosecution relied on was committed when the defendant was about fourteen. Because an offence committed while under eighteen is not counted for enhancement under Section 94, the Supreme Court held the lower courts' increase of the sentence to be unlawful.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 6905/2562 (2019)
The offence of carrying a weapon in a public place is a petty offence, which under Section 94 cannot attract an increase of punishment.
Among several convictions, the court treated carrying a weapon in a public place as a petty offence and, applying Section 94, held that no increase of punishment could be imposed for that count.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 3098/2566 (2023)
Because both the present and the earlier case were petty offences, Section 94 bars using the prior record to increase punishment, although fingerprinting for investigation remains lawful for other purposes.
The court noted that the current and prior offences were petty offences, so Section 94 prevented using the prior record to increase the punishment. It added that fingerprinting was still lawful as part of investigation and not solely for enhancement.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Frequently asked questions
Can a petty offence be used to increase my sentence?
No. Under Section 94, a petty offence cannot be counted, whether as the prior or the current offence, for the purpose of increasing punishment under Sections 92 and 93.
Does an offence I committed as a minor count for enhancement?
No. Section 94 provides that an offence committed while under eighteen years of age is not regarded as an offence for increasing punishment under the recidivism rules.