Court’s Unlawful Reading of Judgment to Absent Defendant
Exhibit 2. The Prosecutor is the plaintiff in this case against the defendant for the charge of theft. Counsel represented the defendant and requested permission from the court to not attend the court proceedings, which the court granted upon the conclusion of the examination. The court scheduled a hearing for the judgment on December 20, 2536. On that day, the court delivered the judgment, sentencing the defendant to imprisonment for one month. Subsequently, on March 1, 2537, the defendant appeared before court number 6. The defendant appealed the judgment, raising an issue of law. The trial court dismissed the appeal, stating that the time limit for appeal had expired.
Do you agree with the trial court’s order?
The defendant’s appointment of counsel and the request to the court not to attend the proceedings was in accordance with Section 172, sub-section tw of the Criminal Procedure Code, which pertains to consideration and examination of witnesses only and cannot be applied in a judgment or order. It was necessary to read the judgment before the defendant and the defendant’s absence does not constitute a combined hearing as defined in Section 2 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Therefore, the Civil Procedure Code was not applicable. When the defendant failed to attend the judgment, a warrant for the defendant’s arrest was issued. Only after one month of not obtaining the defendant’s presence was the judgment read before the defendant in secret, in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code. The court reading the judgment before the defendant was deemed unlawful. The period for appeal under Section 198 of the Criminal Procedure Code had not commenced.
Therefore, I maintain the original trial court’s order not to accept the appeal, citing the expired time limit for filing an appeal.
Mr. Daeng, the victim, filed a complaint with the police investigator to pursue charges against Mr. Dam.