鞫獄是古代獄訟制度的一個環節，且對下一階段的斷獄影響甚大。近世出土簡牘文獻中，有大量的「鞫之」記錄，對於探究「鞫」在古代司法程序意義有很大的幫助。簡牘中的「鞫之」可理解為司法審判官吏對案件事實的最終認定部分，但基本上是不包括案件的判決結果。同時根據考察，「讀鞫」可在許多場合中使用，過去或認為司法案件僅有一次讀鞫，是不符合事實的。一般案件可分為庶獄及詔獄，其中的鞫訊人員會因案件的性質或犯人的身分及所屬監獄之不同而有所差異。除此，秦漢時代之覆訊制，並非一種固定制度，僅在特殊的情況才會有此措施。再者，漢代三公、劉姓諸侯王及后妃的鞫獄程序，其所受的司法待遇是否異於一般情況，亦是本文所關注的課題。

The trial was an important part of the ancient judicial process, and it greatly influenced the next stage, the sentencing. A large number of ＂juzhi 鞫之＂ interrogation records from trials were found recently on bamboo slips; these are helpful in understanding the meaning of ju 鞫 in the ancient judicial process. These juzhi interrogations can be considered part of the final findings made by the judges on a legal case, but they did not usually include the verdict. Until recently, it was believed that there could only be one duju 讀鞫 'retrial' for each judicial case. However, according to our investigations, retrials could be conducted on many occasions, although the procedure was not always available in the Qin and Han dynasties; only special cases could be re-examined. There were two kinds of trials, those for commoners and those for officials, each with different investigators depending on the nature of the case, the social status of the suspect, and the level of the prison. The differential treatment of the three lords in the Han dynasty, the vassals of the royal house of Liu 劉, and the women (empresses and concubines) of the imperial house are also topics of concern in this paper.