Ruling on a son stealing from his father's wealth
17-8-2015 | IslamWeb
Question:
Does stealing from one's father entail cutting off the hand?
Answer:
All perfect praise be to Allaah, the Lord of the worlds. I testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allaah and that Muhammad, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, is His slave and Messenger.
Indeed, stealing is forbidden and is counted among the grave major sins. If the son steals from his father's wealth before reaching puberty, then he bears no sin for that. The Prophet, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, said: "There are three (persons) whose actions are not recorded: a child, until he/she reaches puberty..." [Abu Daawood and Ibn Maajah]
He has to give back the stolen property to his father without being subjected to Hadd (i.e. corporal punishment prescribed for theft). Nevertheless, this son should be punished in a way that is enough to deter him from committing this sin, if he is old enough to realize what is lawful and what is forbidden. A suitable way should be employed in order to make the son realize the gravity of his sin, keeping his age in mind, so as to ensure a sound Islamic upbringing for the child. If the son steals from his father's wealth after having reached puberty, the majority of Muslim scholars believed that the son's hand should not be cut off as well because the father is obliged to provide for him and because the son is entitled to a share in the father's inheritance. Moreover, the son has the right to enter the father's house. All these facts constitute Shubhas (factors undermining the validity of implementing the Hadd) that avert the Hadd.
The Maaliki scholars believe that if the son stole from his father's wealth, then he should be subjected to the Hadd. Al-‘Adawi 
said, "If the son steals from his father's or grandfather's wealth, then his hand should be cut off due to the weakness of the Shubhah." [Hashiyat Al-‘Adawi]
However, if the son steals from the father's wealth what may fulfills his needs because his father does not fulfill the duty of providing for his children, which has been imposed upon him by Allaah Almighty, then this is not considered stealing, according to scholarly agreement, because the son, in this case, is taking something that he is entitled to. Hind bint ‘Utbah; the wife of Abu Sufyan 
said to the Prophet, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, "O Messenger of Allaah! Abu Sufyan is a miserly man, and he does not give me what is sufficient for me and my children. Can I take of his property without his knowledge?" The Prophet, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, said: "Take what is sufficient for you and your children, according to what is acceptable." [Al-Bukhari and Ahmad]
The same Hadeeth was reported with a different wording; it says, "There is no blame on you… " [Al-Bukhari]
Al-Qurtubi reported on the authority of Al-Haafith Ibn Hajar "The words of the Prophet, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, prove the permissibility of that act. This is understood from his saying to her: 'Take,' and, 'There is no blame.'" [Fat-h Al-Bari]
If this was the case, the father should fear Allaah, the Exalted, and fulfill his duty of providing for his son what Allaah Almighty has imposed upon him. Note that the application of the Hudood (pl. of Hadd) is not to be carried out by laypeople. Identifying the perpetrator whose crime entails the application of the Hadd is the responsibility of Islamic courts.
Allaah Knows best.