Judicial Magistrate (East) Yusra Ashfaq found Abdullah Saleem guilty of offenses under Sections 20 (dignity of natural person), 21 (modesty of natural person and minor), and 24 (cyberstalking) of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) 2016. He was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment on each count, totaling six years.
The court observed that “it is clear that the prosecution has successfully proven the charge against the accused. The prosecution has demonstrated that the accused tarnished the dignity of the complainant and her family, violated the complainant’s modesty, displayed videos without her consent, and displayed them publicly.” Explaining the accused’s motive, the court noted that the evidence showed his frustration and resentment over the refusal of a formal engagement with the complainant due to his anger issues.
The court further observed that the accused had threatened the complainant and began harassing her by creating fake social media accounts and misusing them to transmit her photographs with the intent to take revenge and damage her honor and reputation.
According to state prosecutor Sheraz Rajpar, the complainant testified that she had a friendship with the accused which ended due to his inappropriate behavior. The accused then started creating fake Facebook accounts in her name and sharing her personal photos to blackmail her and her family. The prosecutor added that the complainant stated the “accused admitted to being behind those accounts and threatened her that she would never be able to marry anyone else, even going so far as to say he would force her to commit suicide.”
During the trial, prosecutor Sheraz argued that the complainant’s testimony was corroborated by a verification report, screenshots, IP logs, WhatsApp records, and a detailed forensic report. He added that during the inquiry, the accused had handed over his phone to investigators, and a forensic examination revealed that the “fake accounts and transmissions were linked to the accused’s number and IP address.”
The accused, on the other hand, denied the allegations and claimed he had been falsely implicated. However, the court rejected the defense plea, noting that the defense had failed to produce substantial evidence to support its claims. The case was registered at the Federal Investigation Agency’s Cyber Crime Cell for offenses under Sections 20, 21, and 24 of the PECA.
