Man jailed for stealing jewellery from his wife

KOTA KINABALU: A man, who claimed that jewellery estimated at RM50,000 to be joint property between him and his wife, was jailed and fined by the Magistrate's Court here yesterday for stealing the items from his wife.

Magistrate Mohamad Aizat Abdul Rahim sentenced Nurul Huda Mohammad Radzi, 50, to three months' jail from the date of his arrest plus RM5,000 fine, in default, five months in jail after the latter pleaded guilty to stealing the items at a condominium here on February 9.

The accused was convicted under Section 380 of the Penal Code for theft in a dwelling house, an offence that carries a jail term of up to 10 years and shall also be liable to a fine, upon conviction.

Prosecuting officer Inspector Albert Basiri told the court that the 40-year-old complainant in this case, who is the accused's wife, stated in her police report made on February 27 that she found that on February 9, her jewellery were missing and she suspected that those jewellery were taken away by her husband.

The prosecution explained that when the wife reached home, she noticed her jewellery and Rolex wristwatch were missing and at that time her husband was in Sabah.

The facts of the case further stated that the complainant claimed to have seen the jewellery worn by the accused and a woman believed to be his lover as both the accused and the complainant shared the same email address, so the complainant could access the accused's pictures gallery and the accused's location.

The prosecution also said that investigation revealed that the accused and the complainant had been married for 15 years and they have four kids whereby the accused was a former chef at a hotel in Johor Bharu and the complainant is a contractor.

In pleading for a lenient sentence, National Legal Aid Foundation counsel Jo Anne Jameson urged court to impose a fine as punishment on her client on the grounds that this was a family affair and the complainant did not suffer any lost as all the items had been recovered and now in police possession.

The counsel explained that according to the accused, he took away the items as he thought that it was a joint properties between them and he did not sell the items but was about to pawn it to help family business.

When asked by the court, the accused said that they are still husband and wife.

The accused further said that he claimed that his wife managed all the family's finances and claimed that he had a right to the properties.

He also said that the properties were not his alone but for both of them such as the house. He claimed that both of them are paying for the house.

The accused, who said that he had just resigned from his job in January, was just merely talking to another person but not having an affair with the person.

The magistrate further ordered for the exhibits to be returned to its rightful owner.

The accused, who seemed unhappy with the punishment, was advised by the court to file an appeal against the sentence if he is not satisfied with it.