A 23-year-old local actor was arrested recently for running away with his married lover.

The man, who has acted in dramas and movies, was arrested when he went to the police to help with the investigation into a complaint made by his lover's husband, Harian Metro reported.

The husband found that the woman, who is also the actor's manager, was missing when he returned home from work and proceeded to make a police report.

It was said that the actor and his manager have been carrying on an affair for about a year, since the woman started working for him.

We were a little confused by the arrest as it sound more like a morality issue than that of law and order, but apparently, the state has more say in our personal lives that we would have thought.

There's a law against adultery and for some reason, people are still charged under this law

Apparently, one could be charged under Section 498 of the Penal Code for enticing, with criminal intent, a married woman, which carries a jail term of up to two years or a fine or both if convicted.

We were kind of aware of this law because of the very public case against a popular television personality's then-boyfriend in a lawsuit filed by her ex-husband, but it's still weird to read about more arrests under this law.

As we all know, our law is legacy of the British occupation and some of the stuff in it should have been long struck out...like criminalising suicide, but we digress.

Section 498 is no less archaic and just plain weird because at the end of the day, only the man who 'enticed' the woman can be charged under this law.

('cos, you know, women have no brains or will of their own so they must have succumbed to the nefarious actions of the man.)

The woman cannot be charged under the same law, nor can a man be charged if a woman brings up an adultery case against her husband, according to AskLegal.

So, basically the law only protects the husband who is deemed to be the injured person here.

Other charges against the actor

Apparently, the actor doesn't exactly have a squeaky clean record.

He's had drug convictions before and is also being investigated under Section 14 of the Minor Offences Act 1955 (Act 336), although we're not exactly sure for what offence.