Legal-Judicial Study of the Verdict on Multiple Crimes resulting from a Single Strike
Journal Title: فقه و اصول - Year 2014, Vol 46, Issue 96
Abstract
In case multiple crimes are caused by a single strike, there are three different beliefs concerning the ruling on this issue. The renowned majority of jurists have deemed as necessary the payment of blood money (diya) by the criminal for all the crimes perpetrated. Another group, who has maintained the interference of crimes, are themselves divided into two groups. One group maintains interference and consequently deems as necessary the payment of only one diya in an absolute way and another does so with some conditions. The legislator, who had not previously stated a clear ruling regarding multiple crimes resulting from one strike, has tried to state the ruling on this issue in the new Islamic Penal Law. The legislator has acted very poorly in this respect, because he has not only rejected the generally accepted assertion but has also, for accepting the ruling on the interference of crimes, added the condition of no-intentionality of the criminal’s strike to the conditions already mentioned by the second group jurists. That is to say, the legislator has practically not accepted the view of any of the jurists in this regard. The present writing is a library/documentary research that has been organized by descriptive-analytic method and concluded by a legal-judicial study that if the second crime is the result and outcome of the main crime and one is major and the other minor, the minor will interfere in the major and contrary to the articles proposed by the legislator, there is no difference between the intentionality and non- ntentionality of the criminal’s primary strike.
Authors and Affiliations
YūSuf NūRā’ī, MuḥAmmad HāDī ṢāDiqī ṢāDiqī
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP184503
- DOI 10.22067/fiqh.v46i16.14986
- Views 132
- Downloads 0
The evolution of Khul’ divorce theory in Shiite jurisprudence
This article aims, with a detailed insight into the historical process of Khul’ divorce in two phases in Arabia before Islam and after Islam, to discover the creation of successive theories and the evolution of ‘the Khul...
An exploration into the concept of ‘assisting with sins’ in imami jurisprudence opinions
The notion ‘assisting with sins’ is a rule founded upon argumentations from the Qur’an and tradition, reason and consensus, and its authority is unassailable. There is almost no dispute as regards its authority, whereas...
A Jurisprudential-Exegetical Exploration into the Lawfulness of Sacrifice in Revealed Scriptures in Light of Āya 5 of Sūrat al-Mā’ida
The lawfulness of dhabīḥa (sacrifice) in Revealed Scriptures is implied from āya 5 of Sūrat al-Mā’ida, and the reason for it, besides the contexts and appreciativeness of the ruling for lawfulness, is that the word ṭa‘ām...
The liability of kinship group (‘Aqilah) in a different perspective
Reputable Imami jurisprudents believe that liability for involuntary manslaughter (wergild or diyah) is incumbent upon the institution called ‘Āqilah (paternal kinship group of the criminal). From the very beginning, the...
An Inquiry into the Issue of "Prohibition of Lahw" as a Jurisprudential Rule
This article is a research concerning the issue of lahw (vain pursuits) from the jurisprudential point of view to answer the question as to whether it is possible to prove the prohibition of lahw as a jurisprudential rul...