What is the ruling regarding theft from a bathhouse if the bather leaves his clothes without appointing a specific guardian?
Chapter on Amputation in Theft
Al-Mughni
Book of Ḥudūd (Prescribed Penalties)
Primary text
If a person removes his clothes in the customary manner and does not entrust them to anyone, there is no amputation penalty for the thief, and the bath attendant (hammami) incurs no financial liability (ghurmun) because he was neither formally entrusted with the property (not a wadi') nor was the property secured (muhrazah) for amputation to apply.
Supporting text
If the hammami assumes responsibility for guarding the clothes, he becomes a formal trustee (wadi') and is liable for financial restitution due to negligence if the property is stolen after he neglects his duty of observation and safekeeping. However, if he actively guards and watches the clothes, he is not liable for restitution if they are stolen, and the thief is subject to amputation because the property was secured. The apparent position of Ahmad suggests no amputation in this case because people are generally permitted entry to the bathhouse.