---

The question of plurality and repetition of crime in the Iranian criminal law may be approached from three different angles: first is the definition which has been given to the said terms. Despite some doubts, there has been no change regarding the definition of the plurality of crime after the 1979 Revolution. However, as to the repetition of crime, the Iranian legislator while considering the issue of Hodud (God made punishment), has made an incomplete definition open to criticism. Second is the distinction which has been made between two kinds of material plurality of crimes. The legislat or has divided it to two category of material plurality of similar and different crimes. As to the later, the rule of collective punishment has been applied, whereas regarding the former, the rule of unity of punishment or the court's discretionary power to aggravate the penalty has been accepted. This initiation has also taken root from the hodud issue but considering the fundamental and substantive differences which exist between the rules governing Hodud and Tazirat (Judg made punishment), this measure of the legislator is untenable. Third issue concerns the criterion of aggrevating punishment in plurality of similar crimes and repetition of crime. The legislator, in spite of granting the judge the discretion to aggravate punishment, has indicated no criterion for it. This has led the Iran's supreme court to take a decision on the basis of the principle of nulla poena sine lege when it approached the issue of plurality of similar crimes. It did not approved the power of the courts to determine a punishment more than the maximum legal penalty.

---

The victim's intervention in the proceeding and the hearing of the pain and injuries inflicted on them are considered influential factors while passing judgment on the accused under New Zealand criminal law. The victim is either injured because of the crime or has already been vulnerable for some reasons exuberates the situation. The New Zealand criminal system assesses type and offense-seriousness in both cases to pass sentence on the accused.  The present research aims to study the impact inflicted on rape victims in determining sentences. It is a descriptive, analytical study conducted using the content analysis technique. A purposive sample of 15 rape cases was selected from the New Zealand criminal system and coded using ATLAS software.  The results show that if the accused is found guilty of pre-planned raping by resorting to physical violence, making sense of humiliation and severe mental harm, or rape is committed against vulnerable victims, the court aggravates the culprit's punishment based on the extent of the harms inflicted on them. It can be in the form of an increases period of preventive imprisonment, rejection of the plea for mercy or conditional discharge, the traverse of revision, and the extension of therapeutic or rehabilitation courses or compelling the offender to join them.