A comparative study of the rule of bone dislocation in Figh and statutory law

Injuries to the bones can sometimes appear in the form of broken bones, sometimes in the form of comminuted bones, and occasionally in the form of fractured bones. Bone dislocation is also another type of injury to the bones that is considerably controversial among Islamic jurists in terms of whether the injuries are curable or not. At this issue, some jurists have extended their judgment of skull bone dislocation to the other bones of the body while some other jurists, drawing upon the words of Zarif -Ibn- Naseh, have defined certain recompense for each bone dislocation which distinguishes it from other bones’ dislocation. Some others have declared the recompense for this injury in terms of a rule, and believe bone dislocation accounts for as much as half of the compensation for the same broken part. The legislator, therefore, according to the controversies, does not follow a single procedure. Due to the importance of the issue, the present article, using the library research method and taking an analytic and descriptive approach, investigates the perspectives of the Islamic Law, their evidence and documents, and the legislator’s perspective on this issue and at the end makes some suggestions in order to reform the status quo.