Garuda - Garba Rujukan Digital

????? ???, ??? ????

Unknown Affiliation

Author-ID : 1206392

Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document

Claim Missing Document

Articles

A Legal Study of Lending Paper Money and the Impact of Inflation on it ????? ???, ??? ????
??? ? ???? ???? 40 ????? 3: ????? ????? 81? ????? ? ?????? 1387
Publisher : ???????? ??????? ?????? ????

?? ???? ??????? ???? ???? ???? ? ??? ???? ?? ?????? ???. ??? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ??? ??? ??? ????? ??? ? ???? ? ??? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ?? ????. ?? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ?????? ????? ????? ? ???? ???? ??????? ?? ???? ??? ? ???? ?? ?? ??? ???? ?? ?????? ? ??? ????? ?? ???? ???? ??????? ???? ???? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ??? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ????. ???? ????? ????? ? ??????? ?? ???? ???? ??????? ?? ?? ???? ?? ????? ?????? ???? ?????? ?? ??? ?? ????? ???? ?? ??? ????. ??? ?? « ???? ???? » ?? ????? ???? ??? ?? ??? ????? ???. ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ? ??????? ???? ????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ??? ? ???? ????????? ??? ? ? ??????? ????? « ??? ????? » ?? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ???? ???? ???. ???? ?? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ? ??? ?????? ????? ? ??? ? ????? ??????. ????? ??? ? ??? ?? ????? ?????? ?????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ?? ????? ??? ??? ?? ????? ?? ??? ??? ? ????? ?? ?? ??? ????????? ?? ????????? ???? ??? ????? ????? ?? ????? ? ???? ??? ? ??? ???? ??? ????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ? ???? ????? ???? ????? ??? ???? ?????? ??? ????? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ?????? ? ????? ??? ?????? ???? ?? ???. ???? ???? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??????? ?? ? ??? ????? ??? ? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ?????? ?? ?? ??? ??? ? ??????? ????? ? ????? ?? ?? ??? ???????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ???? ??? ?? ???? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?? ??? ??? ???? ?? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?????. ???? ???? ??: ???? ??????? ?????? ???? ????? ?????? ????? ?????? ???.

A Study on the Religious Percept of Removing Goods from the Place of Safe Custody while under Hypnosis ????? ???, ??? ????; ???? ????, ??? ?????; ??????, ????
??? ? ???? ???? 51 ????? 1: ????? ????? ??6? ???? ???8
Publisher : ???????? ??????? ?????? ????

A requirement of Hadd theft on which there is consensus, in addition to the requirement that the stolen goods are kept in a place of safe custody, is that the thief, alone or with another?s participation, removes the goods from the place of safe custody. One of the most important doubtful instances of removing the goods is theft while under hypnosis. The authors, after analyzing the criterion of removing the goods from the place of safe custody, have concluded that, in certain instances, it applies to the hypnotist's act, i.e. where they have the capacity that the act of removing the goods from the place of safe custody is attributed to them and their act is an example of contributory removal. In some other instances, the Hadd of imputation is executed against the hypnotized person i.e. where they have the capacity that the act of removing the good from the place of safe custody is attributed to them. If there is doubt whether removal from the place of safe custody has taken place, although there is dubiety concerning concept and over the least and the most of one thing, given Mohammad Ibn Muslim's  sahiha (authentic) tradition,  the requirements of removing the good from the place of safe custody, as well as the requirement that the goods are kept in a place of safe custody, are included in the concept of theft and accordingly, the theft verse loses its generality and may not be invoked. Therefore, in such case, due to astonishment and wander, by invoking the requirement of Dar rule (no Hadd is executed in case of dubiety), Hadd of imputation is not executed against the thief.

JURISPRUDENTIAL STUDY OF THEFT OF ALIMONY BY WIFE Ø¯ÙˆØ±Ù‡51 Ø´Ù…Ø§Ø±Ù‡3 Ø³Ø§Ù„1398 ????? ???, ??? ????; ???? ????, ??? ?????
??? ? ???? ???? 51 ????? 3: ????? ????? ??8? ????????8
Publisher : ???????? ??????? ?????? ????

One of the exceptions to Hadd for theft is the theft of husband?s property by wife. A review of the Islamic jurists? statements indicates disagreement among them regarding the limits and scope of this issue. A group of Islamic jurists believe that theft of husband?s property by wife in exchange for alimony is absolutely permitted and may not lead to the Hadd of amputation. Another group maintain that theft by wife is authorized only in case she is in emergent need of alimony and the absoluteness of this opinion necessitates that in case of theft of husband?s property by wife, even if the husband does not fail to pay alimony and such theft is neither in exchange for alimony nor equal to it, while the wife is in need of alimony, the Hadd of theft is not executed on her. A third group believe that in case the husband refrains from paying alimony and the wife steals his property to the amount she needs, or if the stolen property is beyond her need, the extra amount does not reach the limit of Hadd, the punishment for such theft is not Hadd. After the arguments of these three groups are studied and criticized, finally, through analyzing the famous hadith of the Prophet, it is concluded that where the wife appropriates the husband's property in exchange for her alimony and the husband fails to pay alimony, non-execution of Hadd is in accordance with the rule, given the existence of debt and application of retaliation (taghass), and is it is not necessary to refer to the Hind's hadith. However, in case the wife appropriates the husband?s property in exchange for the child?s alimony and the husband fails to pay, given the non-existence of debt and the subject of retaliation (taghass), non-execution of Hadd is not in accordance with the rule.  Therefore, the only source for solving the problem in this case is the Hind's hadith.

Title

Found 3 Documents
Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title Search

Found 3 Documents Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title

Found 3 Documents
Search