If both the striking and the miscarriage are established, and the striker claims the miscarriage was not due to his strike, what is the ruling?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Blood-Money (Diyyāt)
Primary text
If the miscarriage occurred immediately following the strike, the woman's statement prevails, as it is presumed the strike was the cause due to its immediate succession to an action capable of causing it. If the man claims she struck herself, took medicine, or another person caused it, and she denies this, her statement prevails with her oath, based on the presumption of the absence of those alternative causes.
Supporting text
If the miscarriage occurred days after the strike, the ruling depends on her state: if she remained in pain until the miscarriage, her statement prevails. If she was not in pain, the man's statement prevails with his oath, analogous to a case where a person is struck, remains unharmed, and dies days later. If they disagree on the existence of pain, the man's statement prevails as the default is the absence of pain. If she was in pain for part of the time, and the man claims her pain ceased while she denies it, her statement prevails, as the presumption is the continuation of the pain.