In crimes against physical integrity, the legislator, based on Islamic jurisprudence, has prescribed the punishments of qisas (retribution) and diyyah (blood money) as enforcement measures for intentional offenses, while for unintentional crimes, it has merely sufficed with diyyah. Additionally, in certain cases, scattered and inconsistent applications of discretionary punishments (ta’zir) have been introduced. However, in all bodily harm crimes where qisas is not applicable, ta’zir is not imposed, and in unintentional crimes, only specific cases are subject to discretionary punishments. Therefore, our focus lies on critically examining the discretionary enforcement mechanisms in crimes against bodily integrity and the challenges arising from the absence of a coherent and balanced legislative approach. To this end, we first address the conditions that lead to the nullification of qisas in intentional bodily harm crimes. Subsequently, by analyzing the legal nature of diyyah, which is largely regarded as a means of financial compensation rather than a purely criminal punishment, we conclude that in instances where qisas is not applicable and diyyah alone is insufficient, ta’zir can serve as a public punitive measure.Furthermore, regarding unintentional crimes, the role of severe negligence as a key factor in determining criminal liability and punishment is examined. In situations where an individual, without criminal intent but through negligence or recklessness, causes bodily harm, they violate both legal and religious obligations. Such an act, being prohibited, may render the perpetrator subject to ta’zir in accordance with the principle: "al-ta’zir li kull ‘amal muharram" (discretionary punishment for every prohibited act).Thus, to enhance coherence and justice within the criminal justice system, it is essential for the legislator to adopt a unified approach that comprehensively addresses all crimes against bodily integrity, ensuring that discretionary punishments are administered with fairness and consistency.