What is the ruling on dismissing a worker who stole from his colleagues, knowing that his motives for stealing were for treatment or a surgical operation for one of his children?

If a lease contract is for a fixed term, the original principle is that both parties are obliged to fulfill it, unless it is rescinded due to a legitimate excuse. The theft by a worker from their workplace is considered a legitimate excuse that permits the termination of the contract. The majority of jurists hold that a lease can be rescinded due to a legitimate excuse, and theft is a defect in what is contracted upon, as it causes a deficiency in the service and leads to a lack of trust. The jurists have indicated the termination of a lease due to theft in similar cases, such as the theft by a rented slave, a wet nurse, and a worker in musaqah (irrigation contract).

Accordingly, the employer has the right to dismiss the thieving worker, taking into consideration the public interest. If the thief is known for goodness and necessity, then concealing their act is more appropriate. However, if they are known for evil and squandering trust, then dismissal is more appropriate as a deterrent for them and to protect the work.