One of the types of murder which is often faced with ambiguity and on the diagnosis of which there are disagreements is the quasi-Intentional murder. This is due to the fact that it is a combination of premediated and erroneous murder. Because the perpetrator has the intent to act, it is similar to premediated murder and since he/she has no in intent to kill, it is similar to erroneous murder; that is why it is called quasi-murder. The question is what is the meaning of quasi-Intentional murder in the above legal systems? We answer it comparatively. In jurisprudential texts it is mentioned that “arrest the quasi-murderer if he has intent in his act or is wrongful in his intent”. In Iranian criminal law the quasi-Intentional murder is a killing in which the perpetrator has the intent to perform a non-fatal behavior but has no intent to kill. The text of the Art. 121-3 of the French Criminal Code reads as follows: “There is no felony or misdemeanor in the absence of an intent to commit it. However, the deliberate endangering of others is a misdemeanor where the law so provides”. What is shared in these three systems is the typically non-fatal intention and lack of will to kill. There is no disagreement between Imamiyah jurisprudential texts and 2012 Islamic Criminal Code of Iran, but manslaughter is divided into quasi-Intentional and erroneous murder in Imamiyah jurisprudence and Iranian criminal law; a division which is not mentioned in French criminal law and only the term manslaughter is used. The approach of this paper is the comparative study of principles and rules of the above three criminal law systems.

Self-defense as one of the justified causes of crime or the reason to drop retaliatory punishment (death penalty) has been defined and legislated by the legislator according to articles 156, 302 and 303 of the Islamic Penal Code 1392. Iran's legislature has sought to develop the substantive provisions of legitimate defense and increase its scope from real to extreme and apparent types in the articles of reference. Despite this, in the field of formal rules governing this legal institution, especially the authority that determines it, according to the majority of judges, especially in the prosecutor's office, it has lacked the necessary clarity and courage, and even with the approval of Article 265 of the Criminal Procedure Law, the ambiguity is doubled and the judicial procedure in terms of the possibility of intervention and the exercise of legitimate defense by the prosecutor's office, it has confused and adopted taste. By adopting the qualitative method and extracting the approaches of Iran's criminal justice system through field investigation and in-depth interviews, the present research seeks to answer the basic question of what harms may cause from the acceptance of legitimate defense in the prosecution in cases of Intentional homicide and the strategies to overcome the existing challenges. The result of this research shows that not only the discretion in the exercise of legitimate defense and the investigation of its complex conditions is beyond the power of the prosecution and the unit investigation authority and it has serious and effective challenges, but with the above mentioned legal texts, validity is determined by the Criminal Court and the prosecutor's office does not have the legal competence, authority and discretion to accept it. In this way, the public meetings and judicial decisions and consultative opinions of the legal department of the judiciary, which is under the jurisdiction of the prosecutor's office in the exercise of legitimate defense with any party and has taken steps to stabilize the prevailing judicial thought and practice, are against the legal standards and the belief of the judges of the Criminal Court and the Supreme Court of Iran.

Intentional replantation has been suggested as an acceptable replacement to conventional endodontic procedure when either conventional or surgical endodontic treatment could not help in treatment of the lesion.During the past few decades controvercies have developed with respect to the value of this technique. This article will examine the role of Intentional replantation in dentistry and review indications and contraindications, treatment rationale, technique, and factors affecting success.There has been controvercies on the Successfulness of the technique. A comprehensive review has been conducted with report of a case carried out on this method.

According to Imamite Fiqh, if a man Intentionally kills a woman, the legal guardian of the woman can pay half of the blood money of the man and ask for a death sentence for him. With regard to the fact that blood money is compromise able and needs the agreement of the murder, sometimes this verdict becomes practically problematic because sometimes the guardian may not be able to afford to pay the blood money differentials and/or the murderer is not willing to compromise. As a result, the woman's murder remains unretaliated. There are a number of solutions to this problem including considering an equal amount of blood money for men and women, paying the women's blood money by government [Beyt al-Mal], not asking for the murderer's consent. Critically studying the first two solutions, this paper supports the third one.

Aims Intentional homicide is one of the most violent crimes against humanity. The aim of this study was to investigate the demographic, psychological factors and motives for murder in Intentional homicide prisoners referred to Khorasan Razavi province forensic medicine organization. Instruments & Methods This cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted on Intentional homicide prisoners referred to Khorasan Razavi province forensic medicine organization during 2018-2020, that among them 105 people participated in the study by available sampling method. The data collection tool was a researcher-made questionnaire with an interview. Data were analyzed using SPSS 21 software and descriptive statistics methods and Chi-square test. Findings Most of Intentional homicide prisoners were men, married, aged 21-30 years, with the educational level of cycle, self-employed, and the middle child of the family and born and lived in the city of Mashhad. Most of the motives for the killings were related to the killings that followed the fight and revenge. The most commonly used means of murder were sharp objects that hit the chest. Most of the murders took place in public places and the victims were mostly friends. The most common way to remove a corpse was to burn it. There was a significant relationship between gender, age category, marital status and birth rank with committing murder (p<0. 001). Conclusion Mental health officials must take steps to prevent homicide by addressing material and spiritual deficiencies, training life skills, and dealing effectively with problems.

One of the most important aspects of ransom is its legal nature; whether the ransom payment is because of its punishment nature or of its wreck or both ones. The other point is that the legal nature of ransom would have functional effects in commandment and if yes it should be argued that why there is no discussion in juridical books.The present article attempts to study the reasons of ransom wrecks and punishments and finally surveys on the offered solutions for the related issues.

Uncertainty or error in word means mistake, ignorance and unawareness. And in legal sense it means that the murderer targets an objective person but hits somebody else and kills him/her for any reason including lack of skill or involuntary causes. In respect to the impact of error in target on nature of murder, it seems two modes should be distinguished: 1- If a person intends to shoot on a punishable thing, animal or person and his shoot would go wrong and hit a respectful one, in this case the murder is considered as pure error.2- If a person intends to shoot on a respectful one, but his shoot would go wrong and kill another respectful person, this case is assumed as Intentional murder according to criminal rights logic. Regarding Shiite jurists view on error in targeting, most of them assume this kind of murder as pure error without distinguishing between shooting to a punishable or a respectful person. The same case is seen in Article 296 Islamic Penal Code (1370). Fortunately, by deleting old article 296 and registering Clause “D” Article 290, the new legislator has been trying to declare that error in targeting where both primary and final target are respectful persons, has no impact on the nature of murder (as according to Article 294, error in identity has no impact on the nature of murder) because if we accept that legislator’s goal is to protect each person not one or some specific one (s), then there is no difference who would be murdered at the end. The important point is that a respectful person is murdered so the murder is considered as Intentional murder.

Background and purpose: The legal regulations governing the performance of police officers during the implementation of law enforcement missions suffer from the existence of two major disorders. First, police officers who deathly shoot during armed missions are punished as individuals who, with personal motives, procured weapons and weapons and killed another person. Second, the behavior based on the intention to kill is considered the same as the behavior of killing without the intention to kill, and the punishment of self-retribution is applied to both cases.Research method: The current research is applied and of a review type. Legal provisions and jurisprudence related to the subject have been analyzed.Findings: The nature of police missions is related to two types of life risk: on the one hand, there is a possibility of life risk for the officers at any moment, and on the other hand, some police missions are carried out with the aim of freeing a hostage or a person who Life is in danger. In both cases, it is necessary to equip police officers with appropriate tools and to include the conventional risks of equipping these officers with firearms in the legal guarantees. In the field of acceptance of the risks caused by equipping the officers with firearms, no reprimanding action has been taken and the occurrence of fatal shootings during the police mission does not have a legal basis for mitigating or reducing the punishment for the officers. In the process of judicial investigation of accusations related to deadly police shootings, the changing and dynamic conditions of time and place governing the missions and the limitations governing the calculations and decisions of the officers are under the shadow of unconventional arguments and mental expectations. takes and does not appear in judicial decisions.

The Intentional Crimes against physical integrity are among the crimes in which the private aspect is very colorful due to the direct harm to individuals. Therefore, the retribution as the main penalty like the blood money is given to victim or his/her parents. This issue has led some to ignore the separate right to punishment for society. In Islamic jurisprudence and consequently in the regulations of Iran, the discussion of the legitimacy of the ta'zir of the perpetrator in in case of retribution, the subject of the social aspect of crime, had become one of the challenging issues after the victory of the Islamic Revolution. In the Islamic Penal code adopted in 2013, by enacting general provisions in Article 447, has tried to regulate the ta'zir of the crimes in a disciplined manner, although the amount of ta'zir, especially in the case of physical crimes less than murder, is very ambiguous. In other Islamic countries, too, the social aspect of the crime has been recognized. In the present article, with a descriptive analytical method, this issue has been studied in a comparative manner according to the jurisprudential principles which indicated the strength of the position of identifying the social aspect of Intentional crimes in perspective of jurisprudential documents. In addition in our legal system, the punishment of social aspect in murder according to Article 612 of the Book of Ta'zirat, and Physical crimes less than murder, if they are examples specified in Article 614 or committed with a weapon, will be determined in accordance with this article, otherwise alternative punishments of imprisonment will be imposed.

Subsidiary punishment, based on the principle of the legality of punishments, is imposed on the perpetrator in addition to the main punishment, depending on the commission of the crime. Subsidiary (Consequential) punishment requires a provision in the law. In Intentional murder, the perpetrator is deprived of inheriting property and Diye (blood money) and in quasi-Intentional murders and sheer mistake, he is deprived of inheriting Diye. If there are justified reasons for the crime, such as legitimate defense and the law, this punishment will not be applied to the perpetrator. However, in the cases of factors that eliminate criminal liability, such as murder by a minor and an insanity, forced, murder in sleep, unconsciousness, and murder by mistake, the perpetrator is deprived of inheritance. The application of exclusion in inheritance is not limited to the heir, and the possibility of applying it to the testator, the heir, and the deputy in the case of murder needs to be investigated. Deprivation of inheritance in case of murder is a preventive measure against the occurrence of murder, so that people who commit murder with greed to reach the deceased’s estate, refrain from committing it.