فهرست نشریات علمی دسترسی آزاد ایران

Background and Aim: Some crimes that are inflicted on victim’s head and skull can damage the brain and disrupt or completely deteriorate the interests under the control of the brain. In this assumption, victim’s head is accompanied with multiple crimes; the first crime is when the head or skull itself is damaged, and the second crime is when an interest such as vision, hearing, intellect, smell, etc. is affected as a result of the first crime. Although the criminal legislator has enacted legal articles for the deterioration of these benefits, some of these legal articles are in conflict with each other. Materials and Methods: This article has been written by descriptive analytical method by using library resources through data collection. Conclusion: The criminal legislator has generally stipulated that if the second crime was committed as a result of the first crime and with a single blow, despite the multiple crimes, it is ruled to interfere the blood moneys. However, by studying the legal articles 678 and 692 of the Islamic Penal Code, it can be seen that the legislator by entering into the loss of the interest of reason and vision as a result of a head fracture, without paying attention to the relationship of the second crime with the first crime or dividing it into single and multiple injuries, has absolutely ruled the multiplicity of blood moneys. This ruling has caused a conflict between the two mentioned articles with the general rule of Article 546 of the Islamic Civil Code; As far as it has confused judicial experts and led to the advisory theory of the General Legal Department of the Judiciary. The present research is trying to prove the sufficiency of the mentioned article for the relevant issues by Jurisprudential evaluation of the rule adopted from Article 546 and to propose deleting Article 678 and amending the second part of Article 692.