If the assailants were several, each one of them must pay her a bridal-gift equal to that of her peers and must still undergo the ḥadd. Some Medinan authorities have transmitted from Mālik that the rapist owes no bridal-gift and that the bridal-gift and the ḥadd are never combined, yet the first view is the distilled position of his school.
If a woman forces a man to have intercourse with her, no ḥadd falls on him; the ḥadd is upon her alone. It has been said that both should be punished, but Mālik’s opinion—the correct one when coercion is verified—is that only she is liable.
A woman who is violated while asleep and unaware incurs no ḥadd. Likewise, if a man, in the darkness of night, mistakenly thinks the woman is his own wife, no ḥadd is due upon him, though he must pay the bridal-gift. Whichever of the two knew the truth is subject to the ḥadd, and if the woman is punished because she was aware, her bridal-gift is forfeited.
Whoever contracts marriage with a woman who is among his prohibited relatives, or with a fifth wife, and then has intercourse with her, is flogged with the ḥadd for fornication; today no one is excused on the plea of ignorance in such matters. If the case involves a fifth wife, an excuse of ignorance is accepted and the ḥadd is waived, but no such plea is accepted from anyone who marries a prohibited relative.
Whoever has intercourse with a free woman while knowingly claiming ownership of her is liable to the ḥadd. Whoever has intercourse with a slave woman under a doubtful circumstance—such as owning a share of her, or on the basis of a marriage contract over which scholars differ—incurs no ḥadd. The same exemption applies to a man who sleeps with a girl in his custody, with his own slave woman whom he has married off, or with a slave woman whose enjoyment has been lawfully granted to him; in none of these cases is the ḥadd due.
If someone is proven guilty of fornication and then claims that the woman was his wife, or if a woman claims that she freed her male slave and afterwards married him, neither claim is accepted according to Mālik—unless the claimant is a stranger newly arrived.
Whoever fornicates with the slave girl of either of his parents, or with the slave girl of his wife, incurs the ḥadd; but whoever fornicates with the slave girl of his own child does not.
Mālik holds that a master may carry out the ḥadd for fornication on his Muslim slave woman in the presence of a group of witnesses, no fewer than four. If no one is present, there is no blame on him, but—according to Mālik—he must not flog her.