نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 استادیار فقه و حقوق خصوصی دانشگاه شهید مطهری، تهران، ایران.
2 دانشجوی دکترای دانشگاه شهید مطهری، تهران، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
The examination of the legal evidence that is available to the judge in each case determines a result for the court, which is known as the"judicial truth."This concept sometimes coincides with the actual truth of the case, and sometimes there is a contradiction between the situation that has occurred in reality and the result that the evidence presented indicates. In this latter case, the importance of analyzing the cognitive domain of judicial truth and examining the validity or invalidity of the judge's knowledge as one of the independent evidences in proving claims in general and crimes against chastity in particular is determined. The findings of the present study show that in the position of hearing claims, the rule of judicial truth prevails as a general principle in the judicial system and the judge is only authorized to examine the evidence presented in the case and the invalidity of citing personal knowledge in issuing a verdict is the view accepted in this study.This view, given the way the legislator and the legislator behave in dealing with crimes against chastity,will be consistent in this category of crimes in particular. In contrast to the general rule of judicial truth in crimes against chastity, there are also cases as exceptions in which, although judicial truth proves the occurrence of a crime, since the judge is aware of the actual non-fulfillment of the crime, he issues a ruling based on his personal knowledge, out of caution and to protect the lives and blood of individuals.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
الف) فارسی
13.محمودی دشتی، علی‌اکبر (1373). ادلة اثبات دعوا. قم: مجمع فکر اسلامی.
ب) عربی
)