This note studies the legal opinions over the conducts of those who feel the risk of danger from someone with truthful belief and yet reasonable but in reality, it has not been and for this feeling of danger, they defend themselves. What are the legal status and the court judgment about this kind of defense? Generally, there are three opinions about this issue. The first view has placed the behavior of the defendant (perpetrator) in the area of the exclusion of criminal responsibility. The second attitude believe it is self-defense. The third outlook has studied the conducts of such perpetrator as an essential element for committing a crime from the point of the establishment or non-establishment of the Mens Rea. This issue has also examined from the point of the legal system of Iran and the fuqahāʾ (Islamic Jurists) of Imāmī Shīʿism. Some of them believe the right of self-defense for the putative defendant and some others do not accept it but the legal system of Iran has not taken a clear approach to this subject. The result of the research indicates that putative self-defense can be counted of justifications (justifying reasons) in some conditions such as the fault of the apparent aggressor to make the apparent defendant mistake and the reasonable belief of the apparent defendant that he is in danger and it could be counted of the exclusion of criminal responsibility in some other conditions such as no fault of the apparent aggressor to make the apparent defendant mistake and the reasonable belief of perpetrator that he is in danger.
)