Darulifta Ahlesunnat
(Dawateislami)
Question
What do the noble scholars and jurists of Islamic law say about the following: What is the ruling if the money of the savings pool is stolen from the treasurer? Can the members demand their money from the treasurer or not?
بِسْمِ اللہِ الرَّحْمٰنِ الرَّحِیْمِ
اَلْجَوَابُ بِعَوْنِ الْمَلِکِ الْوَھَّابِ اَللّٰھُمَّ ھِدَایَۃَ الْحَقِّ وَالصَّوَابِ
Before learning the ruling, it must be known that the money in the savings pool will either be considered a debt or Amanah (safekeeping) in the hands of the treasurer. If the savings pool members have directly or indirectly given the treasurer permission to use the money, it will be considered a debt. But if it is explicitly said that the money deposited by the members must be kept safe and the treasurer cannot use it, this money will be considered Amanah. If no such explicit statement indicates whether the money is a debt or Amanah, the ‘Urf (common practice of people) will be observed. If the ‘Urf is to deposit the money and give permission to the treasurer to use the money, it will be considered a debt, as is commonly done in the savings pool of the markets. However, if the ‘Urf is to deposit the money as an Amanah, the money must be kept safe. This is the type of savings pool that is generally in people’s homes. This money isn’t used, and that same money is returned to the members.
After having understood this introduction, the answer to the question is: if the money is given as a debt, or the ‘Urf is that the people deposit the money with permission to use and the money gets stolen, the treasurer will be responsible. This is because if a debt is stolen from a debtor, it will not affect the debt, and the creditor has the right to demand the money. When paying back the debt, a Misli (alike) item must be returned. Therefore, if the members demand their money, the treasurer must pay them.
If the money is given to the treasurer as an Amanah or the ‘Urf is that the people deposit their money so the exact money can be kept safe, as is the case of the savings pools in most homes, the ruling of paying compensation is as follows: If the deposited item was lost or stolen due to the carelessness or shortcoming of the guardian, he will be accountable, whether the shortcoming was intentional, accidental, or forgetful. However, if there was no shortcoming in protecting the Amanah on the guardians part, he kept it in a safe place, even then it was stolen, the guardian will not be responsible. Therefore, if the money was stolen from the treasurer due to his carelessness, he must compensate for the stolen money. But if the treasurer kept the money safe and took all the necessary precautions to protect the money, yet it still was stolen, the treasurer would not have to compensate for it.
Defining debt, it is stated in Tanwir al-Absar, Al-Durr al-Mukhtar, and Radd al-Muhtar:
ماتعطیہ من مثلی لتتقاضاہ(کان علیہ أن یقول لتتقاضی مثلہ)خرج نحو ودیعۃ وھبۃ أی خرج ودیعۃ وھبۃ(ونحو ھماکعاریۃ وصدقۃ،لأنہ یجب ردعین الودیعۃ والعاریۃ ولایجب ردشیء فی الھبۃ والصدقۃ)
(Radd al-Muhtar ‘Ala al-Durr al-Mukhtar, Book of Trades, Chapter of Debt, Vol. 7, p. 406-407, Publ. Quetta)
The safeguarding of the Amanah must be done as per the ‘Urf. This means that all the precautions must be taken to safeguard the Amanah which people generally take. Otherwise, it must be compensated for if lost. Thus, it is stated in Al-Fatawa Al-‘Hindiyah:
اذاربط دابۃ الودیعۃ على باب داره ترکھا و دخل الدار فضاعت ان کان بحیث یراھا فلا ضمان وان کان بحیث لایراھافان کان فی المصر فھو ضامن وان کان فی القری فلا ضمان وان کان ربطھافی الکرم وذھب قیل ان غابت عن بصرہ فھو ضامن و قیل یعتبر العرف فی ھذا و اجناسہ ھکذا فی الظھیریۃ
(Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyah, Book of Safekeeping, Vol. 4, p. 344, Publ. Quetta)
Compensation of Amanah isn’t limited to intentional shortcomings. If the shortcoming in safekeeping the Amanah was mistakenly or forgetfully, even then it must be compensated for. It is stated in Al-‘Alamgiri:
ان ظن أنہ جعلھا فی جیبہ فاذا ھی لم تدخل فی الجیب فعلیہ الضمان کذا فی المحیط
(Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyah, Book of Safekeeping, Vol. 4, p. 345, Publ. Quetta)
Even if the shortcoming in safekeeping is forgetful, it must be compensated for, as stated in Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyah:
لو قال المودع وضعت الودیعۃ بین یدي قمت و نسیتھا فضاعت ضمن و بہ یفتی
(Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyah, Book of Safekeeping, Vol. 4, p. 342, Publ. Quetta)
If the Amanah is lost because of the carelessness of the guardian, he is considered a Ghasib (seizer) and he must compensate for it. It is stated in Fatawa Razawiyah:
اگر دعوٰی استہلاک کاتھا یعنی اتنا زیور اسے عاریۃً دیاتھا،اس نے تلف کردیا تو اب یہ بعینہٖ دعوٰی غصب ہے اوراس کاحکم وہ ہے جواوپرمذکور ہوا:’’وذٰلک لان الامانات تنقلب مضمونات بالتعدی والامین یعود بہ غاصبا‘‘یعنی یہ تاوان اس لئے ہےکہ امانتیں تعدی کی وجہ سے مضمون ہوجاتی ہیں اورامین اس تعدی کی وجہ سے غاصب ہوجاتاہے۔
Translation: If one claims that the jewelry was given to so and so for safekeeping and he intentionally lost it, this in fact is a claim of Ghasab (steeling). The ruling for this is mentioned above: This compensation is necessary because an Amanah must be compensated for if lost due to carelessness, and the guardian will be considered a Ghasib (seizure) because of his carelessness.(Fatawa Razawiyah, Vol. 18, p. 411, Publ. Raza Foundation, Lahore)
وَاللہُ اَعْلَمُ عَزَّوَجَلَّ وَرَسُوْلُہ اَعْلَم صَلَّی اللّٰہُ تَعَالٰی عَلَیْہِ وَاٰلِہٖ وَسَلَّم
(Allah Almighty knows best and His Messenger صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَاٰلِهٖ وَسَلَّم knows best.)
Answered By: Abu Faizan Irfan Ahmad Madani
Verified By: Mufti Muhammad Qasim Attari
Ref No: Sar-8807
Date: 26th Shaban al-Mu’azzam 1445 AH/ 8th March 2024