University of Tehran Jurisprudence the Essentials of the Islamic Law 2008-8744 53 1 2020 08 22 Criticizing of Article 228 of the Penal Code of 1392) Criticizing of Article 228 of the Penal Code of 1392) 213 234 78639 10.22059/jjfil.2020.303733.668939 FA Malihe Nourbasksh Ph.D. student of Jurisprudence and Fundamentals of Islamic Law, Semnan University Hamid Masjedsaraie Associate Professor of Jurisprudence and Fundamentals of Islamic Law, Semnan University Journal Article 2020 06 06 while Article 225 of the Islamic Penal Code recognizes the punishment of stoning in  adultery. Article 228, assumes that when the other party to adultery is immature, the adulterer is entitled to only one hundred lashes. but the punishment of adultery by adulterer with an immature girl, has been silenced without any mention to it. jurisprudential sources indicates  that Imami jurists do not have an unified sentence on this subject; So; the majority of jurists entitle the adulterer and adulteress to a hundred lashes, some have decreed to stoning of adulterer and adulteress And the third view make a differentiation and strongly believe that adulterer deserves to stoning and adulteress deserves to one hundred lashes. This study, with descriptive-analytical manner, re-reads the reasons of this verdict and surveys the received narrations. This article – in addition to reinforce the detailed theory (non-famous viewpoint)- prefers it. The main finding of the research indicates that cited Reasons such as the generality of narration of Abu Basir, the principle of innocence from stoning and the existence of suspicion, do not have adequate authority to repudiate the punishment of stoning to adulterer. The adulterer is condemned to punishment of stoning when the adulteress is non-adult girl. While the adulteress- in assumption of adultery with non-adult boy- is condemned to one hundred lashs. In addition, with the aim of removing ambiguity and conciseness from the above-mentioned article, it has been suggested that the legislator, by adding a note to Article 228, specify the punishment of "stoning" for adulterer in the case of adultery with a non-adult. while Article 225 of the Islamic Penal Code recognizes the punishment of stoning in  adultery. Article 228, assumes that when the other party to adultery is immature, the adulterer is entitled to only one hundred lashes. but the punishment of adultery by adulterer with an immature girl, has been silenced without any mention to it. jurisprudential sources indicates  that Imami jurists do not have an unified sentence on this subject; So; the majority of jurists entitle the adulterer and adulteress to a hundred lashes, some have decreed to stoning of adulterer and adulteress And the third view make a differentiation and strongly believe that adulterer deserves to stoning and adulteress deserves to one hundred lashes. This study, with descriptive-analytical manner, re-reads the reasons of this verdict and surveys the received narrations. This article – in addition to reinforce the detailed theory (non-famous viewpoint)- prefers it. The main finding of the research indicates that cited Reasons such as the generality of narration of Abu Basir, the principle of innocence from stoning and the existence of suspicion, do not have adequate authority to repudiate the punishment of stoning to adulterer. The adulterer is condemned to punishment of stoning when the adulteress is non-adult girl. While the adulteress- in assumption of adultery with non-adult boy- is condemned to one hundred lashs. In addition, with the aim of removing ambiguity and conciseness from the above-mentioned article, it has been suggested that the legislator, by adding a note to Article 228, specify the punishment of "stoning" for adulterer in the case of adultery with a non-adult. https://jjfil.ut.ac.ir/article_78639_d46186514d80d830145acb9ae2266dc0.pdf