This epigram is famously associated with Ghandi and his teachings on non violence. Can justice ever cohere or be coterminous with this saying? What does it really convey jurisprudentially in the context of western style or Islamic/Sharia criminal law? Can a literal interpretation of the term truly serve the ends of justice? In countries like Nigeria with a dualist criminal law and procedure i.e. Sharia law operating side by side with western style criminal code, striking the right balance continue to pose problems at the level of interpretation and execution. It’s a different ball game with ‘theocratic’ Middle Eastern states, for instance – Iran, Saudi Arabia. The famous case of Ameneh Bahrami – who was blinded when a spurned suitor threw acid at her and she asked for the same to be inflicted on him – highlights the dilemma. Read her story http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/13/iran-blind-criminal-acid 
It compels us to ask, what is the purpose of crime and punishment in society? Reformation. Restitution. Or, to reach out for the eye of the convict. Each society must make that decision for itself to suit the mores, values, religion and culture of it’s people. I guess it is safe to say that, an eye for an eye should be at the lower end of that decision scale.
Wrongful Convictions Blog 