The school of pragmatism is one of the prominent and prominent schools of interpretation in the late 19th century in America, which, with components such as expediency and usefulness, assigns a prominent role to the judge as an interpreter. Paying attention to this approach, especially in the field of criminal proceedings, will be the source of challenges such as criminal instrumentalism, components of crime in the current criminal regulations of our country provide grounds for the use of this approach in the judicial system. Based on this, the purpose of this article is to examine pragmatics (pragmatism) in criminal regulations; Fields and challenges. This article is descriptive and analytical, and it has investigated the mentioned subject by using the library method. The findings indicate that the judge is allowed to use non-legal and empirical information, such as sociological or economic information, beyond textual and legal interpretation. Several bases and. Ambiguity and generalization of the legislator in determining the elements of crimes, as well as the authority of the judge in determining the judicial punishment or granting friendly institutions such as accepting the perpetrator's repentance, are among these areas. Of course, the challenges and problems caused by the extension of this type of pragmatic interpretation are far more. Issues such as populism and criminal instrumentalism, and ultimately the existence of split votes and taste among judges and the reduction of the authority of the judicial system, will be among the challenging results of this type of approach.