Is a runaway slave (*aabiqu*) subject to amputation (*qata'*) for theft?
Chapter on Amputation in Theft
Al-Mughni
Book of Ḥudūd (Prescribed Penalties)
Primary text
Amputation for theft is obligatory upon a runaway slave (*aabiqu*), as well as for others who commit theft. This ruling is supported by reports from Ibn Umar and Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz, and it is the position held by Malik and Al-Shafi'i. The evidence for this ruling is the general application of the Book (Quran) and the Sunnah. Furthermore, the runaway slave is legally responsible (*mukallaf*), has stolen an amount meeting the *nisab* (statutory minimum) from a proper enclosure (*hirz*), and therefore, the prescribed punishment applies, similar to a non-runaway slave.
Supporting text
It is argued that amputation cannot be carried out because it constitutes a judgment against the master, and a judgment cannot be passed against an absent party. This argument is rejected because the master's admission is not required for the judgment against the slave, nor does the master's denial cause harm. The judgment is considered valid against the slave based on the slave's actions alone. Moreover, passing judgment against an absent party based on clear evidence is permissible, as established in its proper context.