إذا قُطِعَ يدُ السارق بعد ما هلك المسروق عنده لا يجب عليه الضمان
In the described Hanafi case, when the stolen property has perished in the offender’s possession and the prescribed penalty has taken effect, additional compensation is not imposed.
Another juristic line reasons that the financial obligation caused by destruction of property can remain separate from a criminal penalty. The Shafiʿi position is reported as requiring that compensation.
The core disagreement concerns how the general punitive wording and the distinct financial effect of property loss interact. It is a comparison of classical proofs and legal reasoning.