This study conducts a comparative analysis of the conditions for the establishment and termination of ihsan (marital chastity) of spouses from the perspective of the five Islamic schools of jurisprudence (Imamiyyah, Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanbali) and the Islamic Penal Code of 1392 (2013). The objective is to examine the conditions of ihsan, identify the commonalities and differences among the schools, and elucidate its jurisprudential effects with reference to legal and religious evidence. The main research question is: What are the criteria for the establishment and termination of ihsan in Islamic schools, and how do these differences impact the application of hadd punishments? Employing a descriptive-analytical method with a comparative approach, this study analyzes the concept of ihsan, its conditions of establishment (such as maturity, sanity, valid marriage, consummation, accessibility, and freedom), and the causes of its termination (such as divorce, travel, imprisonment, and apostasy). The findings indicate that all schools agree on the application of the hadd punishment of stoning for a muhsan (chaste married person), but significant differences exist in the conditions of ihsan. For instance, Imamiyyah limits ihsan to permanent marriage, while Sunni schools, due to their rejection of temporary marriage, consider only permanent marriage valid. Additionally, Hanafis, unlike other schools, do not require sanity as a condition for ihsan. The Islamic Penal Code of 1392, influenced by Imamiyyah jurisprudence, defines accessibility (tamkin) strictly for men but more broadly for women. These differences, rooted in jurisprudential methodologies and interpretations of religious texts, affect the nature and severity of hadd punishments. The results of this study can contribute to the enrichment of comparative Islamic jurisprudence and the reform of Islamic penal laws.