Inference of narrow interpretation of criminal law from the propositions of Islamic jurisprudence«

Relying on various interpretations in order to express the intention of the legislator due to the lack of a clear text, has always been one of the main ways to get out of doubt in identifying the legal and religious ruling and obligation. Narrow interpretation is more important than other interpretations in order to comply with the rights of individuals and to comply with various jurisprudential principles. In this article, the capacity of Islamic jurisprudence in having this legal concept is examined with a descriptive and analytical approach, and for this reason, after the nature of narrow interpretation as a jurisprudential or principled rule, the competence of this interpretation is examined on the basis of doubts with the origin of The absence of text, the obscurity of the text and the conflict of two text are examined. It is possible to apply the nature of this interpretation to some usable principles, such as the principle of innocence and principle of permission and dare rule and caution in issuing death penalty. The nature of this interpretation is compatible with some principles such as the principle of innocence and the principle of innocence, as well as rules such as the rule of law and caution in temperature, so that it can be said that the existing capacities in these principles and rules have provided the possibility of narrow interpretation in doubt of low and dobut of fact. Therefore, narrow interpretation is a practical procedure based on valid principles. This interpretation reduces the rules that have criminal interference and its nature corresponds to some of the similar concepts, such as presumption of innocence and accuracy principle and dare rule and caution in issuing death penalty. This conceptual similarity is such that it can be argued that the principles and rules mentioned have made it possible to use a narrow interpretation in cases where we doubt it. Therefore, it can be said that the use of jurisprudence from narrow interpretation is valid for reasons.