Is there amputation if something is stolen from the property of a *Mukatab*?

Primary text

If something is stolen from the property belonging to the *Mukatab*, amputation is obligatory because the *Mukatab*'s ownership over his own property is established. However, if the thief is the master himself, there is no amputation because the master has a right and a doubt (*shubha*) in that property, which repels the prescribed punishment (*hadd*). This is analogous to why the master is not punished (*yuhad*) for having intercourse with his female slave.