Comparative Study the Iran and English Supervision judicial order in the criminal law

The use of criminological and criminological findings in the scope of execution of punishment and institutions as punishment is something that is agreed upon by criminologists and jurists in the present century. In the meantime, judicial oversight appointments are affected by disputes between human rights and the defense of the accused, the criminal law of Iran and the United Kingdom has not stopped this development and judicial supervision agreements have entered the criminal law of these countries. But the question of this article is what are the differences and commonalities between the Iranian and British legal systems in terms of judicial supervision?, the present articleusing descriptive-analytical method, tries to have a comparative study between judicial supervision agreements in criminal law of Iran and the United Kingdom. The results of the present article indicate that despite having many commonalities, especially in the governing principles of judicial oversight and its effects, in the two legal systems, there are three fundamental differences in this regard. First; The fact that in British criminal law, the goal of compromising the accused has been more successful, but in Iranian criminal law, the goal is not to establish the escape and concealment of the accused, secondly. judicial supervision agreements containing negative duties have been designed more carefully and comprehensively, but in Iranian law, The fact that in the criminal law of England is based on the issuance of separate judicial supervision orders, as a result, in the criminal law of Iran, the supervision contracts are more complementary.