In sharia you would not be able to cut off the hands of a theif who stole because he was poor. Instead the blame would be on the state for not making adequate situation so the man would not have stole in the first place. Reimbursement to the one who was stolen from would also come from the state. That is why zakat is a fundamental pillar of Islam because trying to eliminate poverty is a must for Muslims. In real sharia system all the Pakistani politicians would have their hands cut off because they already had money but continued to loot the awam.
As for blood money that is a decision for the deceased family to make. The murderer does not have a say in that decision if they want him to pay by death he will be executed but if they forgive him and instead ask for blood money he is liable to deliver. Blood money must be payed even if the murderer is forgiven because there has to be some compensation. Take the example of Caliph Umar abdul aziz (RA) he was murdered but forgave the murderer yet blood money had to be given which was then put into the treasury.