The actus reus of some crimes, which are referred to as Result crimes, requires the occurence of a specific result, without which the crime will not be established. In such crimes, in addition to proving the result, the chain of causation between the criminal behavior and the result must also be proven. With the proof of causality, there are some factors that enter this relationship and break this chain and make the proof of this relationship more complicated. The victim is also one of the factors involved in the crime puzzle and under certain circumstances can be decisive in the causal relationship. Using a descriptive–analytical methodology, the present study addresses the question of under what conditions the victim can sever the chain of causation, examining the issue within Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) and Iranian law, and comparing it with the approach under English law. The findings indicate that the victim’s physical or psychological condition—regardless of how unusual—may contribute to the occurrence of the result but does not break the causal link. Furthermore, from the perspective of fiqh and Iranian law, only the victim’s voluntary and conscious conduct can break the causal link between the defendant’s act and the result. In contrast, under English law, the victim’s conduct must, in addition to being voluntary and conscious, also be autonomous in order to qualify as a novus actus interveniens capable of breaking the chain of causation.