If, however, a man is known for wrongdoing of the kind alleged, a group of jurists hold that the governor, but not the judge, may beat him. This has been stated by groups of scholars among the followers of Mālik, al-Shāfiʿī and Imam Ahmad. Other jurists hold that he may not be beaten.

It is established in an authentic report from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace:

“He instructed al-Zubayr ibn al-ʿAwwām to subject one of the men under treaty to torture when the man withheld information about the wealth concerning which the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, had made an agreement with them. He asked him, ‘Where is the treasure of Huyayy ibn Akhtab?’

“The man replied, ‘O Muhammad, expenses and wars have consumed it.’

“He said, ‘The wealth was considerable, and it was not long ago.’ He then told al-Zubayr, ‘Take charge of this man.’ Al-Zubayr subjected him to some torture, whereupon he showed them where the wealth was.”

If, however, he claims to have deposited the property with someone, this is a less serious matter. If the defendant is known for uprightness, then, by the consensus of the Muslims, he may not be compelled to pay over the property. Rather, the defendant must swear an oath, whether the official adjudicating the matter is a governor or a judge.

He—may Allah Most High have mercy on him—was asked about an official’s handling of allegations concerning stolen property within his jurisdiction:

If he leaves such matters uninvestigated, property will be lost and evildoers emboldened. If he delegates the matter to one of his subordinates, he considers it likely that the subordinate will act unjustly in these cases, or he knows that he will fail to achieve the intended purpose? And if