What is the ruling if an aggressor severs the hand intended for amputation after the theft but before the proof of theft is established and the cutting sentence is decreed?
Chapter on Amputation in Theft
Al-Mughni
Book of Ḥudūd (Prescribed Penalties)
Primary text
If the hand intended for amputation is severed by an aggressor after the theft but before the proof of theft is confirmed and the judgment for cutting is passed, the same ruling applies: the amputation due to theft is waived. This also applies if the ruler imprisons the thief for witness verification, and an aggressor severs the hand during that time, and subsequently the witnesses are deemed reliable.
Supporting text
The Companions of the Opinion argue that no qisas is incumbent upon the cutter in this scenario because the truthfulness of the witnesses remains probable, thus constituting a legal doubt (shubhah). The authoritative position maintains that since the cutter intentionally severed a limb from someone whom he could have matched (in terms of legal consequence for the limb) without right, the cutting (qisas) is obligatory upon the cutter, just as if he had cut it before any evidence was presented.