Nasai

(1) "The needy person": By this is meant the individual who has nothing to eat, nor enough money to buy anything, and is suffering from severe hunger. For such a person, it is permissible to pick fruit and eat it, because saving one's life is necessary. However, if the owner is present, he should seek permission from him. If the owner does not grant permission, then such a helpless person may pick and eat the fruit even without permission. But he should suffice only to the extent of alleviating his hunger; he should not take any with him, neither by wrapping it in his clothes nor by holding it in his hand. Both of these situations are included in "khabnah".

(2) "Double price": The original price must also be paid by the buyer. If only the original price is imposed on him as well, then what is the difference between the two?

(3) "Punishment as well": That is, both corporal punishment and a fine will be imposed, because some people are very averse to corporal punishment and do not care about fines, while others are miserly and would rather lose their skin than a penny. Therefore, both types of punishment have been prescribed so that all kinds of people may take heed. Taking fruit from the threshing floor is not permissible even out of necessity, because that is, in reality, theft. If it reaches the prescribed limit, the hand will be cut off. If it is less, then both double the price and punishment will have to be borne.

Benefits and Issues:
➊ Permission to eat from the trees is granted only to one who is truly in need and hungry, such as a traveler. This permission cannot be given to local people with criminal tendencies.
➋ In the case of theft of property valued less than a quarter dinar, the judge may impose an appropriate punishment.

Takhrij:
«أخرجه أبوداود، الحدود، باب ما لا قطع فيه، حديث:4390، والنسائي، قطع السارق، حديث:4961، والحاكم.»©Explanation:
➊ In this hadith, various scenarios are possible regarding what has been mentioned. For example: the fruits are still on the tree, and there has not yet been an occasion to pick them. If a hungry traveler picks the fruit and eats it to satisfy his hunger, then by unanimous agreement, no penalty or compensation will be imposed upon him, nor will he be considered deserving of the punishment for theft. However, if he first picks the fruits from the trees, then satisfies his hunger, and furthermore prepares to tie them up in a bundle to take with him, then in such a case, a penalty and compensation will be imposed upon him, and he will also be punished.

And if the owner has already picked the fruits from the trees and piled them up, and the nature of this pile is that of protected property, then in the case of theft from this pile, the punishment of cutting the hand (qat‘ yad) will be applied, provided that the value of the stolen fruit or grain is equal to the threshold (nisab) for cutting the hand.

➋ This hadith also proves that financial penalties are permissible.

➌ The majority of scholars have stipulated the condition of the property being protected for the punishment of cutting the hand, and their evidence is also from this hadith, as has already been mentioned.