Others, however, held that he is not liable for compensation.
Whoever admits to a theft and then retracts his confession on the grounds of some plausible doubt is spared amputation but must still repay the value of the stolen property. Should he withdraw his confession without any such doubt, Mālik’s view varies: in one report he ruled that the ḥadd is carried out, while in another he ruled that it is not.
If a person steals something for which amputation is mandatory, and the owner later donates it to him or he inherits it, the penalty is not canceled once the case has reached the ruler.
Likewise, if someone steals the minimum amount—one-quarter of a dinar or three dirhams—and the matter is not brought before the authorities until the item’s market value has fallen below that threshold, his hand is still cut, for the value is assessed at the moment of the theft.
The thief’s hand is not amputated until two upright witnesses agree on the item’s value. If the witnesses differ over the description of the stolen article or the time of the theft, their testimony is void and the ḥadd is lifted.
Whenever the value of the stolen property or the definition of a secure enclosure (ḥirz) is unclear so that doubt arises, I prefer that the ḥadd be set aside because of that doubt. Saʿīd ibn al-Musayyib said, “For the ruler to err in granting pardon is better than for him to err in inflicting punishment.”
No hand is cut, nor is any ḥadd enforced, at a time when carrying it out would expose the offender to mortal danger from extreme heat, cold, and the like. Nor is amputation carried out in a year of hardship against someone who steals merely to ward off hunger, whether or not the value reaches three dirhams.
Whenever thieves cooperate in taking something that cannot be moved without mutual assistance—such as a timber or a bale—then, if the value meets the threshold for amputation, the hands of all participants are cut. If the stolen item does not trigger amputation, each of them is liable for the full value; should one of them pay it, the obligation is lifted from all, after which they may settle matters among themselves.
In a theft that requires no cooperation, only the person who physically seizes the item has his hand cut. If two conspirators work together by tossing an item out of its ḥirz and passing it between them, both are amputated. It has also been said that they are not amputated unless each participant’s individual share