Among the examples of quasi-intentional homicide is the case where someone strikes another person in a spot that is not normally fatal—whether with a whip, a small stick, a shove of the hand, or a punch in a non-vital area—and the victim subsequently dies. This is classified as quasi-intentional homicide. The perpetrator must offer an expiation from his own wealth: he must free a believing slave; if he cannot find one, he must fast two consecutive months, just as in accidental homicide. In addition, an aggravated diyyah (blood money) is due from the offender’s ʿāqilah (his male agnates responsible for blood money), based on the ḥadīth of Abū Hurayrah:

“Two women of the tribe of Hudhayl fought, and one of them threw a stone at the other, killing her and the child in her womb. The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, ruled that the blood money of the woman be paid by her ʿāqilah.” Agreed upon.

This ḥadīth shows that retaliation is not mandatory in quasi-intentional homicide and that its diyyah is borne by the offender’s ʿāqilah, because it is a form of killing that does not warrant retaliation, so its blood money is assigned to the ʿāqilah just like accidental homicide.

Ibn al-Mundhir said, “All the scholars from whom we have knowledge unanimously agree that it is borne by the ʿāqilah.” Al-Muwaffaq (Ibn Qudāmah) and others likewise stated, “We know of no dissenting opinion that it is upon the ʿāqilah.” End quote.

Accidental homicide, on the other hand, is defined by the jurists as follows: it is to engage in an act one is permitted to do—such as shooting at game or at a target—and the missile strikes a protected human whom the shooter did not intend, killing him; or to kill a Muslim who is standing among unbelievers because one mistakenly thought him to be an unbeliever.