Context & Objective: The question of whether denial can be proven and whether evidence can be presented to support such denial is a matter of significant legal and theoretical importance. Despite its practical implications in judicial proceedings, this issue has not been systematically explored in either Islamic jurisprudence or Iranian legal doctrine. Traditionally, Islamic jurisprudence—especially in its Shi'a interpretation—maintains that the presentation of Bayyina (evidence through the testimony of two just men) is a procedural right exclusive to the plaintiff. However, this exclusivity has been challenged by some scholars. The purpose of this research is to evaluate the legitimacy and scope of the defendant’s right to present evidence in support of a denial, and to assess whether Iranian civil law is in alignment or conflict with Islamic jurisprudential principles. The central research question is whether the current position of Iranian law regarding the proof of denial and the right of the defendant to submit evidence is compatible with established Islamic legal thought.
 Method & Approach: The study employs a doctrinal methodology, relying on a detailed examination of primary legal texts and jurisprudential sources. An inductive approach is adopted to analyze legal principles derived from Islamic jurists’ writings and statutory provisions in Iranian law. By comparing doctrinal positions in Shi'a jurisprudence with the contents of the Iranian Civil Code and Code of Civil Procedure, the study identifies areas of alignment and divergence.
 Findings: The analysis reveals that, contrary to the dominant view in Islamic jurisprudence that restricts Bayyina to the claimant, Iranian law allows the defendant to offer evidence to disprove the claimant’s assertions. This is evident from multiple provisions in the Iranian Code of Civil Procedure, as well as the explicit wording of Article 1328 of the Civil Code, which permits the defendant to avoid taking an oath by proving the falsity of the plaintiff’s claim. These findings highlight a divergence between Iranian statutory law and traditional juristic interpretations, particularly regarding the procedural rights of defendants.
 Conclusion: Although Iranian law departs from the classical Shi'a jurisprudential position on the exclusivity of presenting Bayyina, this divergence does not constitute a violation of Islamic legal principles. The study concludes that the Iranian legal system’s recognition of the defendant’s right to present evidence in denial cases reflects a legitimate development within the scope of Islamic jurisprudence. Thus, the current legal framework in Iran, while not strictly aligned with traditional opinions, remains within the interpretive flexibility permitted by Islamic legal theory.