A Comparative Study of the Role of Repentance in the Fall of Hudud in Imami and Hanafi Jurisprudence

The fall of punishment is one of the fundamental issues in Islamic criminal law and codified criminal laws. In the meantime, the hudud punishment, as one of the important types of punishments, has been determined for specific crimes in Sharia and has found its way into laws through Sharia texts. One of the factors affecting the fall of this type of punishment is the issue of "repentance", which has a special place in Islamic texts. The main question of this research is "What is the position of repentance in Imami and Hanafi jurisprudence and what is the scope of its influence on the fall of hudud punishments?" The main purpose of the research is a comparative study of the role and function of repentance in the fall of hudud punishments in these two schools of jurisprudence. The research method is descriptive-analytical and of a library type, and the necessary data has been collected and analyzed from books, articles, previous research, and reliable jurisprudential sources. The research findings show that in Imami jurisprudence, repentance is one of the most important factors in the fall of hudud punishments; In such a way that all the limits from the aspect of their "right of God" are abolished with repentance. The main evidence for this view is the verses of the Holy Quran and general and specific narrations on repentance; however, in Hanafi jurisprudence, repentance only causes the punishment to be abolished in the case of "moharebeh" and that too before the arrest of the criminal and has no effect on other limits. The argument of Hanafi jurists is also based on specific texts, the generality of the verses of limits and preventing the closure of the rules of limits. The fundamental difference between these two views is that Imami jurisprudence considers repentance to be general and includes all limits from the aspect of their right of God, while Hanafi jurisprudence limits its scope to moharebeh.