This study examines the influence of gender on determining punishments for the crime of zina (illicit sexual relations), with emphasis on the jurisprudential principle of justice. Notably, Iranian jurisprudential texts and legal codes exhibit significant disparities in punishments for men and women, necessitating a justice-oriented analysis. The research employs a descriptive-analytical methodology, reviewing criminal cases and assessing their alignment with the concept of justice. The findings reveal that in certain instances, such as zina bil-ikrāh (rape/forced adultery), men receive harsher punishments than women, justified by the greater reputational and social harm inflicted on female victims. Similarly, in cases of zina with mahārim (incestuous relations), a man who commits adultery with his father’s wife faces execution, whereas a woman who commits adultery with her mother’s husband is only subjected to flogging—a disparity some attribute to cultural perceptions of male honor (namoos). Additionally, in cases of zina with minors, women receive reduced penalties, while men face intensified punishments (execution), justified by the differing degrees of harm to victims. An examination of these disparities in light of the principle of justice indicates that some justifications—such as biological or social differences—are partially acceptable. However, certain punishments warrant reconsideration and further deliberation.