PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

FARHAN KAMRANI vs State S — 2018 YLR 329 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2018 YLR 329 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2018
Reporter
YLR
Parties
FARHAN KAMRANI vs State S
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 20---; S. 21---; S. 497---P; S. 21---C; S. 20; S. 21; S. 497; Crimes Act; Penal Code (XLV of 1860); Crimes Act (XL of 2016)

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

FARHAN KAMRANI VS State S. 20---offences against dignity of a natural person---Scope---Section 20 of prevention of electronic Crimes Act, 2016 provided for the punishment for offences of exhibiting, displaying or transmitting intentionally and publically false information and intimidating or harming the reputation or privacy of a natural person through any information system. S. 21---offences against modesty of a natural person and minor---Scope---Section 21 of prevention of electronic Crimes Act, 2016 provided for the punishment of offences of intentionally and publically exhibiting, displaying or transmitting any information by superimposing photographs of the face of a natural person over any sexually explicit image or video, including a photograph or a video of natural person in sexually explicit conduct etc. S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 419 & 500---prevention of electronic Crimes Act (XL of 2016), S. 21---Cheating by personation, defamation, damaging modesty of a natural person---Bail, refusal of---Complainant had alleged that accused made fake Facebook identity of complainant and superimposed her photographs onto porn videos/ photographs---Investigating agency's officials found incriminating material regarding alleged Facebook identity of complainant on personal computer of accused---Argument of counsel for accused that alleged offence would fall under S.20 of prevention of electronic Crimes Act, 2016 had no force---Prosecution had rightly charged the accused with the offence under S.21 of prevention of electronic Crimes Act, 2016---Although offence under S.21 of prevention of electronic Crimes Act, 2016 did not fall within prohibitory clause of S.497 yet accused would not be entitled to concession of bail because he was connected with offence which seriously affect the whole society---Bail was refused accordingly.

Other judgments reported in 2018 YLR

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English