AN estranged husband breached a non-molestation order during a drunken incident.

Andrew Gilks, aged 40, of Elgar Avenue in Malvern knocked loudly at the home of his wife Lea Gilks in the early hours of the morning after a heavy night of drinking.

Gilks, who admitted he could not remember the incident, was in a relationship with his wife for 11 years before separating, and he has three children with her.

John Cardiff, prosecuting, said: "Just before 4am on the first of October Gilks's wife was woken by a banging on the front door.

"She called out to see who was there and heard the voice of her estranged husband.

"She asked what he was doing there and Gilks replied 'I live here, my wife and kids live here.'

"She told him to go away which he did.

"She said she was petrified by the sight of him there."

Gilks, was banned from being within 100 metres of her home in Malvern as part of the order issued on Thursday September 22, lasting for one year.

The couple ended their relationship at the beginning of September.

Chris Hilton, defending said: "He pleaded guilty at the first opportunity, which is the first thing to mention.

"His wife was a witness at a crown court trial which had nothing to do with the defendant but that was a very traumatic experience for her which Gilks believes led to a deterioration in their relationship and to them separating.

"Bearing that in mind, he does not want to put her through that again.

"He has no recollection of the incident but an important thing to note is when he is told to go away, he goes away, he doesn't threaten violence to the person or the property.

"I query the use of the word petrified as it is a strong word to use, she did not make the complaint until October 5 and the statement was then not taken until October 13, meaning that it was not prioritised.

"He does not usually drink very often, just the odd glass at birthdays and weddings.

"After the separation he was drinking to excess as a way of coping.

"He has not drunk since the incident as he does not want something like this to happen again.

"I believe this can be treated as a one off."

Gilks, who is unable to work due to a back problem, was fined £100, ordered to pay costs of £135 and a victim surcharge of £30 and warned another incident like this would see a much harsher penalty.