The Doctrine of Prescription in Islamic Criminal Law and Its Application in Pakistan: A Contemporary Comparative Study
Clicks: 3
ID: 312374
2024
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Star Article
0.6
/100
3 views
2 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
StarRanked #269 of 395 articles by views in Social Sciences & Humanity Research Review
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 395 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
This study examines the doctrine of prescription (statute of limitations) in Islamic criminal law, with a focus on its theoretical underpinnings, juristic divergence, and application in Pakistan’s hybrid legal system. It explores the permissibility of time-based limitations in prosecuting ḥudūd (fixed penalties), qiṣāṣ (retribution), and taʿzīr (discretionary punishments), particularly analyzing the divergence between the Ḥanafī school—which permits limitation in certain ḥudūd cases based on evidentiary doubt (shubhah)—and the Mālikī, Shāfiʿī, and Ḥanbalī schools, which reject temporal restrictions for divine rights (ḥuqūq Allāh). The paper highlights the Ḥanafī reliance on the maxim al-ḥudūd tudraʾ bi-l-shubuhāt (“ḥudūd are averted by doubts”) and notes that early Ḥanafī jurists, including Abū Ḥanīfa, proposed specific limitation periods, such as six months. In contrast, the majority jurists maintain that divine rights are timeless and not subject to human procedural constraints. Greater procedural flexibility is observed in taʿzīr cases, especially where public interest (maṣlaḥa) or private pardon is involved. The study further assesses the statutory and procedural landscape in Pakistan, where the Hudood Ordinances (1979) codify ḥudūd punishments without specifying limitation periods, thus creating ambiguity in criminal prosecutions. While the Limitation Act (1908) and the Criminal Procedure Code apply time bars to minor offenses, serious crimes remain exempt—reflecting Anglo-common law influence without harmonization with Islamic jurisprudential principles.
Original Contribution: This research makes a novel contribution by providing a focused comparative analysis of classical Islamic jurisprudence and Pakistani statutory practice concerning criminal limitation. It is the first to argue for integrating shubhah-based limitation doctrines derived from Ḥanafī jurisprudence into Pakistan’s legal framework. By grounding the analysis in both traditional fiqh and contemporary legal standards, the study offers a principled proposal for statutory reform that upholds procedural fairness and aligns legal practice with the higher objectives of Sharīʿah (maqāṣid al-sharīʿah).
| Reference Key |
imported_1776692183_69e62bd73e1c0
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Dr. Zainab Amin, Dr. Nazia Bi Bi, Muhammad Aqeel Khan |
| Journal | Social Sciences & Humanity Research Review |
| Year | 2024 |
| DOI |
10.63468/sshrr.033
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.