Abstract: Multiplicity of judges which is called council judgment or collective judgment by some is the process of trial and arbitration in civil or criminal proceedings carried out by at least three judges, so that the verdict is accepted by all or the majority of them. This type of judgment is less investigated in detail and in an all inclusive manner in the existing legal and jurisprudence literature. In this study, major reasons raised by lawyers who are for and against judges’ multiplicity are introduced. The reasons of those who are for it are considered more acceptable. With respect to the status of judgment in the present age (the age of Ghaybah) and the complexities of today’s cases, collective judgment is supposed to have more strength compared to individual judgment. The important point in council judgment is the existence of a significant relationship between judge’s multiplicity system and getting close to criminal justice. It means that applying council judgment system would reduce the probability of making mistakes in judgments and the parties would become content with the judgments. This study which investigates the topic of judges’ multiplicity in Iranian criminal courts is presented in two parts. The first part is the introduction and states the concepts and general issues. Then, a history of council judgment and arbitration in Islam and Iran until the present time is presented. In the second part, the viewpoints of the scholars for and against the theoretical bases of judges multiplicity are taken into account and the issue is studied in laws and regulations.