iM ra llÉ §§
fold.— F i r s t , Shirreeh ftigmatized a falfe witnefs, but did not fcour°-e
him. Secondly, prevention of the crime in future may be effe&ed
by ftigmatizing, and it ought therefore to be adopted as fufficient; for
were beating of fcourging enjoined in fuch cafes, it might operate to
the concealment of the Crime, and the confequent deft ruction of the
rights of others;—in other words, as being a grievous punifhment,
the fear of it might deter falfe witnefles from a confeffion of their
falfehood. With regard to the relation concerning Omar, it evidently
alludes to the inflidtion of punifhment on a criminal, as appears by the
number of ftripes, (namely forty,) and the blackening of the countenance.
Mode offtig- T he mode of ftigmatizing a falfe witnefs, as prefcribed by Shirmatizing
a . . . . ; r J
falfe witnefs. reebj is this.— I f the witnefs be a fojourner in any public ftreet or
market-place, let him be fent to that ftreet or market-place; or, i f
otherwife, let him be fent to his own tribe or kindred, after the
evening prayers, (as they are generally aflembled in greater numbers
at that time than any other ;)— and let the ftigmatizer inform the
people that “ Kdzee Shirreeh falutes them, and informs them, that he
“ has detected this perfon in giving falfe evidence; that they muft
“ therefore beware of him themfelves, and likewife defire others to
“ beware of him.” Shimfal Ayma has faid that a falfe witnefs ought
alfo to be Jiigmatizcd, according to the two difciples ; and that the
degree of correction and imprifonment ought (according to them) to
be left to the difcretion of the Kdzee.^-(The nature of difcretionary
corredtion has been already explained under the head of Punijhments.i)
It is related in the Jama Sagheer that if two witnefles confefs that they
have given falfe evidence, they muft not be fcourged. The tWo difciples
maintain that they are to be fcourged at the difcretion of the
Kdzee.
H E D A T A .
H E D J T
B O O K XXII.
Of RETRACTATION of EVIDENCE.
IF witnefles retract their teftimony prior to the Kdzee pafling any
decree, it becomes void; (that is to fay, the Kdzee muft not pafs
any decree upon i t ;) for the right of the claimant cannot be eftablilhed
but by the decree of the Kdzee; and the Kdzee cannot pafs a decree
upon contradidtory teftimony:—and in this cafe the witnefles are not
liable to make atonement, fince they have not occafioned any injury
to either of the parties. If, on the contrary, the Kdzee pafs a decree,
and the witnefles afterwards retradt their teftimony, the decree is not
thereby rendered void; becaufe, although the fifft allegation on which
the decree pafled be contradidted by the latter, and although the firft
and
Evidence retraced
before
a decree, is
void :
but not i f retraced
after
a decree has
pafled.