The objective of this research is to analyze the fundamental challenges posed to criminal law by blockchain-based crimes and to evaluate the efficacy of jurisdictional frameworks in addressing this emerging phenomenon. The study seeks to address a pivotal question: how do the intrinsic characteristics of blockchain technology—namely decentralization, cross-border operability, and user pseudonymity—render traditional jurisdictional principles inadequate, and what alternative legal mechanisms can be envisaged to remedy this lacuna within the Iranian legal system? Employing a descriptive-analytical and comparative methodology, this study critically examines existing regulations in the Islamic Penal Code, the Law on Computer Crimes, and the Code of Criminal Procedure. It further analyzes the efficacy of the territoriality and active nationality principles within the digital sphere, while exploring the potential of alternative jurisdictional criteria, such as the passive nationality, protective, and universal jurisdiction principles. The findings indicate that while traditional principles remain the cornerstone of the Iranian jurisdictional framework, they are insufficient to address the complexities arising from the decentralized and transnational nature of blockchain-based crimes. Consequently, the research concludes that to effectively combat digital offenses such as fraud and money laundering, the legal system must transcend rigid territorial approaches. Instead, it proposes the adoption of a “basis-oriented” model, wherein jurisdiction is determined not through abstract doctrines, but through a multidimensional assessment of the crime’s characteristics, the status of the perpetrator and victim, and the extent of the impact on protected interests.