Answer
Theft liable to Hadd:
Whoever being an adult. surreptitiously commits, from any ‘hirz’ theft of property of the value of the nisab’ or more not being stolen property, knowing that it is or is likely to be of the value of the ‘nisab’ or more is subject to the provisions of this Ordinance, said to commit theft liable to ‘Hadd’.
Explanation I
In this section “stolen property” does not include property which has been criminally misappropriated or in respect of which criminal breach of trust has been committed.
Explanation 2
In this section, surreptitiously means, that the person committing the theft commits such theft believing that the victim of theft does not know of his action. For surreptitious removal of property it is necessary that, if it is day time, which includes one hour’ before sunrise and two hours after sunset, surreption should continue till the completion of the offence and, if it is night, surreption need not continue after commencement of the offence.
Nisab:
The “nisab” for the theft liable to ‘Hadd’ is four mu four five seven (4.457) grams of gold, or other property of equivalent value, at the time of theft.
Explanation:
If theft is committed from the same ‘Hirz’ is than one transaction, or from more than Hirz and the value of the stolen property in each case is less than the ‘nisab’ it is not theft liable to ‘Hadd even if the value of the property involved in all the cases’ adds up to, or exceeds, the ‘nisab’.
Illustrations
(a) A enters a house occupied by a single family and removes from various rooms property the value of which adds up to or exceeds the ‘nisab’ such theft, is liable to ‘Hadd’, even though the value of the property removed from any of the, rooms does not amount to the ‘nisab’. If the house is occupied by more than one family and the value of the property removed from the ‘hirz’ of any one family is less than the ‘nisab’ then the theft is not liable to a Hadd even though the value of the properties removed adds up to or exceeds, the nisab’.
(b) A enters a house several times and removes from the house on each occasion property the value of which does not amount to the ‘nisab’. Such theft is not liable to ‘Hadd’ even though the value of the properties removed adds up to or exceeds the nisab’.
Commission of theft liable to ‘hadd’ by more than one person:
Where theft liable to ‘Hadd’ is committed by more than one mid the aggregate value of the stolen property is such that if the property is divided equally amongst such of them as have entered the ‘hirz’ each one of them gets a share which amounts to or exceeds the ‘nisab’ the Hadd’ shall be imposed on all of them who have created the ‘hirz’ whether. Or not each one of them has moved the property or any part thereof.
Cases in which Hadd shall not be imposed:
‘Hadd’ shall not d in the following cases, namely:
(a) When the offender and victim of the theft are related to each other as:
(i) spouses;
(ii) ascendants, paternal or maternal
(iii) descendants, paternal or maternal
(iv) brother or sister of father or mother; or
(v) brother or sister of their children;
(b) when a guest has committed theft from the house of his host;
(c) when a servant or employee has committed theft from the hirz of his master or employer to which he is allowed access;
(d) when the stolen property is wild-grass, fish, bird, dog, pig, intoxicant, musical instrument or perishable foodstuffs for the preservation of which provision does not exist;
(e) when the offender has a share in the stolen property the value of which after deduction of his share is less than the ‘nisab’;
(f) when a creditor steals his debtor’s property the value of which after deduction of the amount due to him, is less than the ‘nisab’;
(g) when the offender has committed theft under ‘Ikrah’ or ‘Iztrar’.
Explanation:
If this clause:
(i) “Ikrah” means putting any person in fear of injury to the person, property or honour of that or any other person;, and
(ii) “lztrar” means, a situation in which a person is i apprehension of death due to extreme hunger or thirst;
(h) when the offender, before his apprehension, has, on account of repentance returned the stolen property to the victim and surrenders himself to the authority concerned