Am I responsible for the costs of treating an unintentional injury caused by my son to another boy, or should the family of the boy who initiated the assault share in the cost with me?

The resolution of criminal cases and disputes falls within the jurisdiction of the Sharia (definition) courts or their representatives, as they are most capable of hearing the parties, understanding the reality of the claims and evidence, and issuing a judgment. The Mufti (definition) hears only from one party and cannot issue an accurate ruling in these matters.

The shooter who hit the victim is the liable perpetrator. The fact that his shooting was a reaction does not absolve him of liability, nor does it necessitate the involvement of the first shooter with him, as he was the direct cause of the injury.

A skull fracture does not have a predetermined diya (blood money). It requires a hukumat al-adl (just compensation) estimated by the judge based on his discretion. This is the view of the majority of scholars. The Malikis hold that if the fractured limb recovers and returns to its original state, then nothing is due; otherwise, there is hukuma.

The perpetrator bears the cost of the victim's treatment. The 'aqila (male relatives on the father's side) bears what is due from the perpetrator mistakenly, unless it is less than one-third, in which case, according to the majority, it comes from the perpetrator's own wealth. The father is not obliged to bear what is due from his son; rather, it is taken from the son's wealth if he has any, otherwise, it remains his debt.