Sud hay'atining hukm chiqarish vakolatiga ega bo'lgan bir nechta qozidan tuzilishi joiz emas; biroq, unga hamroh bo'lib bir yoki bir necha qozining hozir bo'lishi ruxsat etilgan, lekin ularning hukm chiqarish huquqi bo'lmaydi, balki faqat maslahat so'raladi yoki fikr bildiradi, va ularning fikri majburiy bo'lmaydi.

It is not allowed for a tribunal to be formed of more than one judge that has the power to render judgement; it is however permitted for one or more judges to be present with him but they would not have the right to judge, but merely to be consulted or to voice an opinion, and their opinion would not be binding. .

Bu shunday, chunki Allohning Elchisi (ﷺ) bir masalani ko'rish uchun ikki qozini tayinlamagan, balki har bir masala uchun bitta qozini tayinlagan. Bundan tashqari, sud ishi Shariat hukmini majburlash yo'li bilan yetkazishdir, va bitta musulmonga oid Shariat hukmi o'zgarishi mumkin emas, chunki u Allohning hukmidir, Allohning hukmi esa yagonadir. To'g'ri, uning talqini turlicha bo'lishi mumkin, lekin musulmonga nisbatan amaliy jihatdan u bir xil bo'lib qoladi va hech qachon o'zgarmaydi. Qozi qo'lda turgan masalada Allohning hukmini majburlash yo'li bilan yetkazganda, bu yetkazish bir xil bo'lishi kerak, chunki bu Allohning hukmini majburiy tarzda yetkazishdir. Shunday qilib, bu Allohning hukmiga amal qilish bo'ladi, Allohning hukmi esa amaliy nuqtai nazardan o'zgarmaydi, garchi tushunish turlicha bo'lishi mumkin bo'lsa ham. Shu sababli, bir xil ish uchun, ya'ni bir xil sudda bir nechta qozi bo'lishi taqiqlanadi. Mamlakat miqyosida esa, bir hududda barcha turdagi ishlarni ko'rib chiqadigan ikkita alohida sud bo'lishi ruxsat etiladi, chunki sud hokimiyati Xalifa tomonidan topshiriladi, shuning uchun bu noiblik kabidir, unda ko'plik ruxsat etilgan, demak bir hududda bir nechta qozi bo'lishi mumkin. Agar nizolashayotgan tomonlar ishni qaysi sudga olib borish yoki ishni qaysi qozi ko'rishi kerakligi haqida kelisha olmasa, da'vogarning tanlovi javobgarning tanlovidan ustun bo'ladi va ish uning tanlagan qoziga topshiriladi, chunki u o'z huquqini talab qilayotgan bo'ladi va bu javobgarning huquqidan ustundir.

This is because the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) never appointed two judges to deal with one matter, rather He (PBUH) appointed one judge for each matter. Besides, the judiciary is the conveying of the Shariah rule by way of enforcement, and the Shariah rule concerning the one Muslim cannot vary, for it is the rule of Allah, and the rule of Allah is one. It is true that its interpretation may vary, but concerning the Muslim from the practical side it remains one and it never varies. When the judge conveys the rule of Allah in the matter at hand by way of enforcement, this conveyance must be one, for it is the conveying of the rule of Allah by way of compulsion. Thus it would be acting upon the rule of Allah, and the rule of Allah from a practical point of view does not vary, even if the understanding does vary. Therefore, it is forbidden to have more than one judge for the same case, i.e. in the same court. As for the country, it is permitted to have two separate courts dealing in all types of cases in one area, because the judiciary is delegated by the Khalifah, so it is like the deputyship where plurality is permitted, thus it would be permitted to have several judges in one area. If the disputing parties could not agree on which tribunal they should take their case to or which judge should look into their case, the choice of the plaintiff would outweigh that of the defendant and the case would be given to the judge of his choice, as he would be seeking his right and this outweighs the defendant..

Sudya faqat sud majlisida hukm chiqarishi mumkin; dalil va qasamni ham faqat sud majlisida ko'rib chiqish mumkin. Buning sababi shundaki, Abdulloh ibn az-Zubayr rivoyat qilgan, u shunday degan:

The judge can only rule in a judicial court; and the evidence and the oath can only be considered in the judicial court. This is because it has been reported on the authority of Abdullah Ibn al-Zubayr who said: .

"Alloh Elchisi ikki da'vogar tomonning qozi oldida o'tirishlarini buyurganlar", deb rivoyat qilinadi bu hadisni Abu Dovud [Sunan, #3588]. Bu hadis sud jarayonini qanday shaklda olib borish kerakligini ko'rsatadi va o'zida qonuniy shakldir, ya'ni sud jarayoni olib borilishi kerak bo'lgan muayyan shakl bor: ikki da'vogar tomon qozi oldida o'tirishi, bu esa sud majlisi bo'ladi. Shuning uchun bu sud jarayonining haqiqiyligi shartidir, ya'ni hukm chiqarilishi kerak bo'lgan maxsus joy bo'lishi kerakki, hukm qonuniy hukm sifatida tan olinsin, va bu ikki da'vogar tomonning qozi oldida o'tirishidir.

“The Messenger of Allah has ordered that the two disputing parties should sit before the judge.” This hadith is narrated by Abu Dawud [Sunan, #3588], and it demonstrates the form in which the judicial process should be conducted, and it is a lawful form in itself, i.e. there must be a specific form in which the judicial process is to be conducted, which is for the two disputing parties to sit before the judge, and this would be the judicial court. Therefore this is a condition for the validity of the judicial procedure, i.e. that there ought to be a special place where the judgement is to be conducted for it to qualify as a legitimate judgement, and this would be for the two disputing parties to sit before a judge. .

Bu, Alining (ra) quyidagi hadisi bilan tasdiqlanadi: Allohning Elchisi (PBUH) unga shunday degan edilar: ﷺ

This is supported by the hadith of ‘Ali (ra) when the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said to him: .

“Ey Ali, agar sening huzuringda ikki nizolashuvchi tomon o‘tirsa, ulardan birortasi foydasiga hukm chiqarma, to birinchisini eshitganingdek, ikkinchisining ham gapini eshitmaguncha. Bu holatda, u zotning ﷺ shunday deganlari ham ayon bo‘ladiki…”

“O ’Ali, if two disputing parties sat before you, do not judge (in favour) for either of them until you hear what the other party has to say as you have heard the first one.” It also indicates a special form where He (PBUH) said: .

"Agar ikki nizolashayotgan tomon sizning oldingizda o‘tirgan bo‘lsa"...

"If two disputing parties sat before you"..

Shuning uchun hukmning haqiqiy bo'lishi uchun sud majlisi zarur, shuningdek, qasamning e'tiborga olinishi uchun ham zarurdir, chunki Allah Elchisi ﷺ shunday degan: .

Therefore the judicial court is a must if the judgement is to be valid, and is also a must for the oath to be considered, for the Messenger of Allah ( PBUH) said: .

"Qasamni (qasam) mudda'a aleyhga berilishi kerak", — deb Ibn Abbos rivoyatida al-Bukhoriy rivoyat qilgan [Sahih, #2668]. U sud majlisidan boshqa joyda mudda'a aleyhi sifatida qaralmaydi. Xuddi shunday, guvohlik ham faqat sud majlisi oldida qabul qilinadi, chunki Allah Rasuli ﷺ shunday degan:

The oath must be given by the defendant,” as narrated by Al-Bukhari on the authority of Ibn Abbas [Sahih, #2668]. He would not be considered as a defendant except in a judicial court. The same applies for the evidence, it cannot be considered except before a judicial court, for the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: .

"Da'vogar dalil keltirishi lozim, qasam esa inkor qiluvchi zimmasiga yuklanadi." Imom al-Bayhaqiy rivoyat qilgan.

"It is the plaintiff who should provide the evidence, and the oath is obliged on the one that contests." As narrated by Al-Bayhaqi. .

Bundan tashqari, u faqat sud majlisida da'vogar sifatida qaralishi mumkin.

Additionally he cannot be considered a plaintiff except before a judicial court. .

Turli turdagi ishlarga ko‘ra sudning turli darajalarini tashkil etish joizdir. Shunday qilib, ayrim sudyalarni ma’lum darajada muayyan turdagi ishlarni ko‘rish bilan cheklash, boshqa ishlarni esa boshqa sudlarga yuborish joiz bo‘ladi.

It is permitted to have various levels of court according to the type of cases. Thus it would be permitted to have some judges confined to dealing with specific cases to a certain extent, and to refer other cases to other courts. .

Shu sababli, qozilik ham xalifa tomonidan topshirilgan vakolat bo'lib, u xuddi noiblik (vakillik) kabidir, hech qanday farqi yo'q. Aslida qozilik noiblikning bir turi bo'lib, u umumiy ham bo'lishi, xos ham bo'lishi mumkin. Shuning uchun ma'lum ishlarni ko'rish uchun faqat shu ishlar bilan shug'ullanadigan qozi tayinlash joiz bo'ladi; bunday holatda u belgilangan ishlardan boshqasini ko'rishga haqli bo'lmaydi. Shuningdek, bir xil joyda ham, yuqorida zikr etilgan ishlarni ham, boshqa barcha turdagi ishlarni ham ko'rish uchun boshqa qozi tayinlash joiz. Demak, turli darajadagi sudlar joriy etish mumkin, va musulmonlarda bu o'tmishda ham bo'lgan.

This is because, the judiciary is a delegated by the Khalifah and it is just like the deputyship, with no difference at all. In fact, the judiciary is one form of deputyship, which can be general and can also be specific. Therefore, it would be permitted to have a judge appointed to deal in specific cases only, in which case he would not be allowed to deal with other than those cases specified. It is also permitted to appoint another judge to look into all sorts of cases including those mentioned, even in the same location, or to look into cases other than those mentioned. Therefore it is permitted to have various levels of tribunal, and Muslims had this in the past. .

Al-Mawardiy o‘zining "Al-Ahkom as-sultoniyya" nomli kitobida shunday yozgan: "Abu Abdulloh az-Zubayr aytdi: Bir muddat davomida bu yerdagi (Basra) amirlar markaziy masjidda (Al-Masjid al-Jomi') qozi tayinlar edilar, uni masjid qozisi deb atashardi. U yigirma dinor va ikki yuz dirhamdan oshmaydigan miqdordagi nizolarni hal qilar, nafaqalarni belgilab berardi. U o‘ziga belgilangan joydan va unga berilgan chegaradan chiqmasdi."

Al-Mawardi wrote in his book entitled Al Ahkam Al Sultaniyya: "Abu Abdullah Al-Zubayr said: For some time, the Amirs here in Basra used to appoint a judge at the central mosque (Al-Masjid Al-Jami'), they called him the judge of the mosque. He used to judge in disputes involving sums not exceeding twenty Dinars and two hundred Dirhams, and he used to impose the maintenances. He would not go beyond the place assigned to him and the limits given to him." .

Allohning Elchisi ﷺ qozilik ishida boshqalarni o‘rniga vakil qilib tayinlagan: u Amr ibnul Os ni bitta ishni ko‘rib chiqish uchun tayinlagan, Ali ibn Abu Solibni esa Yamanda qozilikka mas’ul qilib, har qanday ishni ko‘rish vakolatini bergan. Bu esa maxsus va umumiy qozilikka ega bo‘lish joiz ekanligini ko‘rsatadi.

The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) delegated others on his behalf in the judiciary; he appointed Amr Ibnul Aas to look into one case, and he appointed Ali Ibnu Abi Talib over the judiciary in Yemen with powers to look into any case. This indicates that it is permitted to have a specific and general judiciary. .

Apellyatsiya sudlari ham, kassatsiya sudlari ham mavjud emas, shuning uchun ish ko'rib chiqish usuli jihatidan sudyalik tizimi bir xildir. Agar qozi hukm chiqargan bo'lsa, u majburiy kuchga ega bo'ladi va boshqa qozining hukmi uni hech qanday holatda bekor qila olmaydi. Ilohiy qoida shunday deydi: "Ijtihod o'xshash ijtihod bilan bekor qilinmaydi." Demak, mujtahid boshqa mujtahid uchun hujjat emas; shu sababli, boshqa sudlarning hukmlarini bekor qiladigan sudlarni tashkil etish noto'g'ri.

There are no courts of appeal and there are no courts of cessation, so the judiciary, as far as the method by which the cases are treated, is one and the same. If the judge pronounced a sentence, it would become binding, and the sentence of another judge would not under any circumstances reverse it. The divine principle states: "ijtihad is not annulled by similar ijtihad." So, a mujtahid is not proof against another mujtahid; so it is invalid to have courts that nullify the verdicts of other courts. .

Biroq, agar qozi Shariatga asoslangan hukmni tark etib, kufr hukmiga ko'ra hukm chiqarsa, yoki Kitob, Sunnat yoki sahobalarning ijmosi (ijmaus-sahoba) bilan zid keladigan qoidaga ko'ra hukm qilsa, yoki haqiqatga zid keladigan hukm chiqarsa, masalan, birovni ataylab qotil deb hukm qilsa, keyin haqiqiy qotil topilsa, bunday hollarda qozining hukmi bekor qilinadi.

However, if the judge abandons ruling by the Shariah and judged according to a rule of disbelief, or if he judged by a rule that contradicts a Shariah text from the Book, Sunnah or the Ijmaa of the Sahabah, or he issued a verdict that contradicts with the reality, such as if he judged on somebody as a deliberate killer, then the real killer appeared. In such cases, the verdict of the judge is reversed. .

Bu sababli Allahning Elchisi ﷺ shunday deganlar:

This is because the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: .

“Bizning ishimizda (dinda) o‘zimizdan bo‘lmagan narsani ixtiro qilgan har bir kishi – u (amal) rad etiladi”, deb rivoyat qilingan Al-Buxoriy [Sahih, #2697] va Muslim [Sahih, #1798] tomonidan Oisha roziyallohu anhodan.

“Anyone who invented something in our matter (deen) that which is not from it, it would be rejected”, as narrated by Al-Bukhari [Sahih, #2697] and Muslim [Sahih, #1798] on the authority of ‘A’ishah. .

Jobir ibn Abdulloh tomonidan rivoyat qilinadi: “Bir kishi bir ayol bilan zino qildi, shuning uchun Payg‘ambar ﷺ uni qamchilashni buyurdilar. Keyinchalik unga u uylangan ekanligi xabar qilindi, shuning uchun u toshbo‘ron qilinishini buyurdilar”. Molik ibn Anas ham rivoyat qilib, shunday degan: “Usmon (r.a.) haqida xabar oldim: unga bir ayol olib kelindi, u olti oydan keyin tug‘di, shuning uchun u ayolni toshbo‘ron qilishni buyurdi. Ali (r.a.) unga dedi: ‘Toshbo‘ron qilish to‘g‘ri emas, chunki Alloh (S.W.T.) shunday deydi: .

It is also narrated by Jabir b. Abdullah: “That a man committed adultery with a woman, so the Prophet PBUH) ordered that he be lashed. Later on he was informed that he was married, so he ordered that he be stoned”. Malik b. Anas also narrated, that he said: “I got knowledge about ‘Uthman (ra), that a women was brought to him where she gave delivery after six months so he ordered her to be stoned, Ali (ra) said to him: ‘It is not valid to be stoned, because Allah (S.W.T) says: .

"(Bola)ning emizikdan ajratilishigacha ko'tarilishi va ... o'ttiz oy davom etishi" [46:15]. Va U (SWT) aytadi: .

The carrying of the (child) to his weaning is period of thirty months” [46:15] And He (PBUH) says: .

"Onalar, emizishni xohlagan kishilar uchun, bolalarini to'liq ikki yil emizadilar." [2:233].

“The mother shall give suckle to their children for two whole years, for them who desire to complete the term.” [2:233].

Shunday qilib, homiladorlik davri olti oy bo‘ladi, shuning uchun uni toshbo‘ron qilmaslik kerak.” Shunga ko‘ra ‘Usmon (r.a.) uni qaytarib keltirishni buyurdi, ammo u allaqachon toshbo‘ron qilinganini aniqladi. ‘Abd ar-Razzoq Al-Imom Ath-Thavriydan rivoyat qildi, u shunday degan: “Agar qozi Allohning Kitobiga yoki Payg‘ambar ﷺ sunnatiga zid hukm chiqarsa yoki unda ijmo mavjud bo‘lgan biron masala bo‘lsa, undan keyingi boshqa qozi uni bekor qilishi mumkin”.

Thus, the pregnancy period is six months, so she should not be stoned.’ Accordingly ‘Uthman (ra) ordered that she be returned back, but he found that she had already been stoned.” ‘Abd al-Razzaq narrated from Al-Imam Al-Thawri that he said “If a judge gave a verdict opposite to the Book of Allah or the Sunnah of the Messenger (PBUH) or anything where there is an Ijmaa over it, then another judge after him may reverse it”. .

Biroq, bu hukmlarni bekor qilish mas'uliyati Mazalim sudyasiga yuklatilgan.

However, the responsibility of reversing these verdicts is to the Judge of Mazalim.