Investigating the restoration of criminal procedure in Iran's judicial system

Restoration of the procedure is one of the most extraordinary ways of complaining of definitive opinions (legal procedure), and the legislator anticipates conceivable possibilities that may occur after the issuance of a definitive decree to prevent the execution of a wrongful judgment or conflicting or conflicting rulings or sentences Based on false documents or false testimony, or to consider reasons subsequently obtained, indicating innocent convict, or disproportionate punishment or non-offending action (one of the cases referred to in Article 474 of the Criminal Procedure Code), the authority to review and prescribe re-examination Filed the case with the Supreme Court. Often, after any definitive criminal conviction, even if it is issued with a clear conviction against the verdict, it is also alleged to have been sentenced to trial by the Supreme Court of the State with a claim of torture or mental imbalance.Because the moratorium is unpredictable for this request, at any time, even after execution, the convicted offender can be verifiable. Usually convicted because he or she is often unaware of the rules governing reinstatement, or to try to test the odds and the likelihood of admitting a lawsuit, however, repeats its repeated requests. Due to the high volume of these cases and the limits of the Supreme Court branches and the urgency of handling cases and the strengths and weaknesses of this establishment, it needs to be investigated in judicial proceedings. The findings indicate that most of the requests for reinstatement in respect of non-compliance with Article The above is rejected by the Supreme Court.