نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی پژوهشی
نویسنده
دانشیار فقه و مبانی حقوق اسلامی دانشگاه مازندران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
The holy lawgiver has paid special attention to the ruling on theft during famine and has ruled out the hadd punishment on the thief in general. In Article 268 of the Islamic Penal Code, one of the conditions for hadd theft is the absence of theft during famine and hunger. From a jurisprudential perspective, although there is no disagreement in principle about accepting this condition, there are differences of opinion among jurists in the way of accepting this condition from several aspects, such as the condition of the stolen property being makula and the condition of necessity for theft. In this article, the author refutes and concludes the statements and evidence of jurists on the condition of the stolen property being makula and, by considering the relevance between the subject and the ruling, he arrives at a third theory other than the view of jurists. That is, if the theft is committed in a year of famine to satisfy hunger and hunger, the hadd punishment is not applied to the thief. Without making any difference between the property being makula and non-makula. Also, not imposing the hadd on a thief is not conditional on the thief being forced to steal, because apart from the absurdity of the term “famine year”, there is no connection between the famine and the emergency
کلیدواژهها [English]
)