What is the ruling when the owner takes back his own property and also takes an identifiable amount of another's property mixed with it?

Primary text

If the owner takes his own property and also takes an identifiable amount of another person's property mixed with his, there is no amputation. This is because he took the wealth he was entitled to take, and the taking of the other property occurred necessarily as a consequence of taking his own. Therefore, amputation should not be applied, as he possesses a semblance of right in taking it, and the prescribed punishment (*hadd*) is waived by doubt (*shubuhāt*).