Is the foot of a thief subject to amputation if the right hand cannot be cut?

Primary text

There are two opinions regarding the amputation of the thief's foot. The soundest opinion states that the foot should not be amputated because the amputation was not originally mandated for the foot based on the theft, and the failure to cut the right hand does not necessitate cutting the foot, similar to a case where the right hand was already missing. The second opinion holds that the foot should be amputated because cutting the right hand was prevented, thus the foot is cut instead, analogous to the situation where the left hand was missing at the time of the theft.