What is the ruling when a custodian admits a deposit belongs to one of two claimants but does not know which one specifically?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Deposits
Primary text
If the custodian states the deposit belongs to one of the two but cannot specify who, and both claimants acknowledge the custodian's ignorance, the rightful owner is determined without the need for the custodian to swear an oath. If the claimants assert that the custodian knows who the owner is, the custodian only needs to swear one oath stating that they do not know the identity of the owner. This is because the claimant imposes only one matter upon the custodian: knowledge of the owner's identity, thus requiring only one oath, unlike when denying ownership entirely to both.
Supporting text
Abu Hanifa holds that the custodian must swear two oaths, similar to when denying ownership to both claimants. The Hanbali reasoning differentiates this because the two claimants present two separate claims against the custodian (that it belongs to each of them). If the custodian denies ownership to both, lots are cast between them, and whoever wins the lot must swear, and the item is delivered to them.