they both testified for her regarding the divorce of her husband, while they knew [of her falsehood and forgery], then the judge ruled for her divorce, it would be lawful for her to remarry, and it would be lawful for one of the two witnesses to marry her. He cited as evidence what was narrated from Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, that a man claimed marriage to a woman, so he referred her to Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, and two witnesses testified to that for him, so he ruled between them based on the marriage. She said: By Allah, he did not marry me, O Commander of the Faithful, perform a marriage contract between us so that I may be lawful for him. He replied: Your two witnesses have married you. This indicates that the marriage was established by his judgment. Also, because li'an (imprecation) dissolves marriage even if one of the two is a liar, so a judicial ruling is more appropriate.

Our position is the statement of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "I am only human, and you bring your disputes to me, and perhaps some of you are more eloquent in their argument than others, so I judge for him based on what I hear from him. Whoever I judge for in something belonging to the right of his brother, let him not take anything from it, for I am only cutting off for him a piece of Hellfire." (Muttafaq 'alayh). This includes the case where one claims that he bought something from another, and he rules in his favor. Moreover, it is a ruling based on false testimony, so it does not make lawful for him what was forbidden to him, such as absolute property. As for the report regarding Ali, if it is authentic, there is no evidence for them in it; for he attributed the marriage to the witnesses, not to his judgment, and he did not respond to her request for marriage because it involved casting aspersions upon the witnesses. As for li'an, the separation occurs by it, not by the truthfulness of the husband, which is why if evidence were brought concerning it, the marriage would not be dissolved.

Once this is established, if one testifies against a woman regarding a marriage and the judge rules accordingly, but she is not his wife, she is not lawful for him, and it is binding upon her in outward appearance. She must resist him as much as she is able; if he compels her to it, the sin is upon him, not her. If the man has intercourse with her, our companions and some of the Shafi'i scholars said: The prescribed punishment (hadd) is upon him; because he had intercourse with her while knowing she is an unrelated woman (ajnabiyyah). It is also said: There is no hadd upon him; because it is an act of intercourse whose lawfulness is disputed, so it constitutes a doubt. It is not for her to marry someone else. The companions of al-Shafi'i said: She is lawful for a second husband, except that she is prevented from him in the ruling. The judge (al-Qadi) said: The marriage is valid. Our response is that this leads to the combination of intercourse with the woman by two men, one of whom has intercourse with her by the ruling of outward appearance, and the other by the ruling of inward reality. This is corruption and is therefore not prescribed.