A Comparative Study of Qatl-e-Khata: Legal Frameworks and Penalties in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan

Abstract

This comparative study analyzes the legal frameworks and penalties for Qatl-e-Khata in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, which are two Muslim-majority countries with different legal systems. The study aims to highlight the similarities and differences in the application of criminal law related to unintentional killing in both countries. Using a qualitative research methodology, the study examines the legal frameworks of both countries, including the relevant statutes, case law, and legal precedents. The study also analyzes the penalties for Qatl-e-Khata under both countries' legal systems, including the range of punishments and the factors considered in sentencing. The findings of the study reveal significant differences in the legal frameworks and penalties for Qatl-e-Khata in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. While both countries rely on Islamic law as a basis for their legal systems, the interpretation and application of Islamic law differ between the two countries. Saudi Arabia's legal system relies on a strict interpretation of Islamic law, while Pakistan's legal system is a hybrid of Islamic law, British common law, and local customs.

The study concludes that the penalties for Qatl-e-Khata in both countries vary widely, with Saudi Arabia imposing stricter penalties than Pakistan. The study also identifies the need for further research and analysis of the legal frameworks and penalties for Qatl-e-Khata in other Muslim-majority countries.