Is the property of one who denies misappropriation but claims to have purchased the goods subject to burning before proof is established?

Primary text

If the one who committed misappropriation denies it and claims to have purchased the items in his possession, his property shall not be burned until his misappropriation is proven by evidence or confession. This is because burning is a punishment, and it is not incumbent before it is established, similar to a statutory punishment (hadd). Furthermore, only two just male witnesses are accepted for proof in this regard.