He—may Allah be pleased with him—was also asked:

A man died, leaving two daughters and a wife, with one daughter absent. May the person overseeing the estate deposit the absent daughter’s property with someone when it is not known whether that person will safeguard it or use it for his own benefit?

If an unjust demand is made against the estate as a whole, should the cost of warding it off be borne solely by the absent daughter’s property, or by the entire estate?

If the property is entrusted to someone who might safeguard it or might use it for his own benefit, may its rightful owner pursue a claim against the person who took possession of it, or against the person who deposited it where its safety could not be assured? The overseer and the depositor have died; the property was sought among the depositor’s estate but was not found, and it is not known whether it was forcibly taken or not. Is the custodian’s liability discharged by leaving the matter as it stands, despite the possibility that he actually took possession of the property? Or should his representative from among his heirs pay that amount on his behalf from his charitable funds that were not earmarked for any particular purpose?

He replied:

Praise be to Allah. This property came into his possession as a trust, so he must safeguard it as entrusted property should be safeguarded, and must not deposit it with anyone else except out of necessity. If he deposits it with someone who can reasonably be expected to safeguard it—such as a just judge, if one is available, or someone else—such that entrusting it to that person involves no negligence, then he bears no liability. But if he is negligent in depositing it, entrusting it to a dishonest person