This thesis aims at defining the inspection procedure in which the legislator sanctioned challenging a certain sanctity due to a committed crime in order to put the public interest over the individuals' private interest for the sake of reaching a materialistic evidence that unveils the truth, take into account the legal guarantees added by the law on such procedure and guaranteed by the constitution in the first place and by answering the following queries: 1- Rules that govern the inspection warrant & its conditions? 2-Invalidity of inspection warrant? To answer these questions, the researcher presented the issue in a detailed manner which started by defining inspection as a legal procedure, which is the subject of this study, in order to differentiate it from the protective or administrative inspection. He explained what makes it characterized from other inspections methods. Then he covered its formal and substantive conditions. In this frame, he elaborated in detail on the inspection of individuals, its places& rules that govern it. The researcher supported the formally legal applications. Following are the most significant result reached by the study: 1. The inspection procedure has to relate to the committed crime; consequently, no inspection action is to be done to disclose a future crime. 2. There should be an accusation directed to the person the inspection will be made on him or his house, or when there are presumptions which prove that he possess crime-related things. 3. The subject court has no other option than judging the invalidity of the successive action in case the previous procedure was the cause or the presumed legal introduction to take the successive procedure, otherwise, its judgment will be against law, or in case the successive procedure was actually influenced by the previous procedure. Therefore, the result came on a certain way, and that can be reckoned by what the subject court uses and what it decides upon the circumstances of time & place of the two procedures.