عنوان مقاله [English]
wife's position among of the right of retribution is one of the critical issues in criminal jurisprudence that has been examined in this article. The primary and vital question that has been raised and discussed is how the approach of criminal jurisprudence regarding the position of the wife in the holders of the right of retribution can be explained? The article is descriptive-analytical and examines the question using the library method. The findings indicate disagreement in criminal jurisprudence regarding the holders of the right to retaliation. According to the well-known view of the jurists, the rightful owners of retaliation are the same as the victim. From this perspective, all male and female relatives have the right to retaliation as the victim, but the wife does not have the right to retaliation. According to another view, the right to retaliation belongs only to paternal male relatives, and maternal relatives, whether male or female, do not have this right. Accordingly, women are not entitled to retaliation if they are paternal relatives or relatives. As a result, it must be said that the wife has no right to demand retribution and amnesty. The common denominator of the two views is that the wife does not have the right to retaliate. Traditions, consensus, and cases such as the lack of relative bond between couples are among the jurists' reasons for rejecting the wife's right to retaliation, which can be criticized and considered and are not strong reasons in this regard.