The principle of "last resort", as one of the sublime achievements of human criminal thought, emphasizes the primacy of non-criminal solutions and the limitation of criminal interventions. This principle, which has its roots in the justice-oriented teachings of legal philosophers and developments in modern criminal policy, allows criminal intervention only when other options are ineffective. The present study, with the aim of measuring the level of commitment of judges of the Hamedan and Bahar counties to this principle, analyzed their views and practices using statistical methods. The findings indicate that judges adhere moderately to this principle and have a relatively moderate approach in dealing with defendants; however, in the area of ​​security crimes, there is still a tendency towards strictness. Also, the tendency towards restorative justice in the face of dissatisfaction with peace-making institutions indicates structural challenges in the effective implementation of this principle in the judicial system. This research emphasizes the need to rethink Iran's criminal policy and modernize the judicial culture based on human dignity and penal rationality.