Background: Evidence in criminal matters is a line drawing that connects the different stages of criminal proceedings from the moment a crime is discovered to the issuance of a sentence. Gathering evidence and then evaluating and measuring them is far away, and what is considered as a mechanism of reasoning in criminal matters is the search for absolute material truth or reality. Paying attention to this serious matter is in fact due to the importance that moral schools attach to the issue of individual freedom and respect. Therefore, the present study was formed with the aim of examining respect for the freedom of individuals and studying the reason in Imami jurisprudence and Iranian criminal law.
Conclusion: A statement of incorrect information, a false report, a forged writing, a false testimony, or an inaccurate or deviant expert statement may mislead the judge and result in an innocent conviction. The emphasis of moral schools on the need to adhere to citizenship rights and respect for the freedoms of individuals at all stages of the trial doubles the need and importance of addressing the issue of reason. In criminal proceedings, what embodies criminal justice is the active presence of the judiciary in exploring the evidence and accessing the truth. The principle of freedom of reason must be determined in the light of legal criteria and its limits and validity must be known. And in a general approach, the legal framework of the principle of freedom of reason is limited on the one hand to the boundaries of detailed reason and on the other to the boundaries of the legitimacy of education.