The comparison of fault in the civil and criminal liability

Certainly law makers in any community in response to changes in condition of a society enact some laws and execute them permanently to punish those persons that are wrong doer of law in domain of civil law or in domain of penal codes.Among these Acts that are made by researches and jurists and society's legislators execute it, the civil liability and criminal liability that will be stable for injured party from crimes and felony that by this law people could access to their moral and material rights. It is possible to say that civil and criminal liability are instrument that is established to compensate damage and fulfill the rights of injured party in domain of material and moral damage, the institute that circumstances and appropriates of time make it stable and enforceable. It seems that, the way of some of jurists that consider it necessary for access to appropriate of time, in fact it is a way to fulfill justice and implement the soul of law that existed in that. The essential element of fault whether in civil liability or in criminal liability is one of necessary organ of liability that is stated by majority of famous jurist specially the late Dr. Nasser katouzian, and consider its necessity of proving by injured party as one of necessary requirement of establishment of civil and criminal liability. By considering and study of jurisprudence articles and narrations this subject will pass through the mentality of any human that existence of rule of no loss and damage, destruction and causation that is provide the relation of attributive action to maker of loss, without emphasis and paying attention to fault element although perhaps be possible, but is effective on the providing of its attributive element, meaning that certainly fault element should be proof by injured party. So writer in this article try to judge the written view of jurists in order to find a way for study for other researcher.