A fraudulent practice by which one party to a commutative contract (ba’i, ijarah, salam, etc.) attempts to deceive the other party into trading at unusually unjust terms. Shari’a prohibits ghaban in general, and ghaban fahish in particular. A limited degree of ghaban (ghaban yaseer), however, can be ignored depending on the contract value and specific circumstances.

According to the Hanbali school of thought (mazhab), ghaban falls into three categories:

• Talaqqi al-rukban: it is a practice dating back to the pre-Islamic era when city merchants used to meet incoming caravans or on-foot travelers outside the city walls bearing goods to sell. The merchants were to buy these goods at unusually low prices and bring them into the city where they were offered for sale to the city dwellers at higher prices. Thus, the sellers have the option to void these trades once they reach the city market and find out that they were deceived into trading at abnormally low prices. This shari’a basis for this option is based on the prophetic hadith: “don’t meet incoming merchants outside the market; and if they transact with someone and then enter the market, they have the option”. (Narrated by Muslim on the authority of Abu Hurayrah).
• Al-najsh: a deceptive price hiking whereby a third party pretends to be a buyer and deliberately bids up the price of an object without any real intention of purchasing it. This practice is deceptive because it aims to fool a buyer into bidding up the price to an unusual level. The buyer, if uncovered the fraud, has the right to void the sale and redeem the price he paid. However, if the buyer is unable to prove the fraud, the transaction will still in effect, and he will have no option to return the object of sale.
• Ba’i al-mustarsil: a sale which is associated with unsound judgment on the part of either the buyer or the seller. This may result from ignorance of the value of the object of sale, i.e., not being able to estimate the fair price. In this event, the deceived will have the option to void the contract if the unjust price was abnormally or prohibitively high. The affected party’s claim of ignorance (or unsound judgment) is accepted if given under oath.