Supreme Court orders trial in online sextortion case to proceed

The Supreme Court has overturned decisions by the Criminal Court and High Court and ordered the Criminal Court to proceed with the trial of a man accused of posing as a woman online to obtain sexually explicit photos and videos before attempting to extort money from the victim.

The Prosecutor General's Office filed charges last year against Mohamed Fawaz Luthfy of Lileegasdhoshuge, S. Feydhoo.

According to the prosecution, Luthfy created a false identity on Snapchat and communicated with a man over several months. During those exchanges, he allegedly persuaded the victim to send sexually explicit photos and videos before threatening to publish the material unless money was paid.

The Criminal Court dismissed the case, ruling that it could not be prosecuted under the Sexual Offences Act because the alleged conduct did not involve direct physical contact or an in-person sexual act.

The High Court upheld that decision, prompting the Prosecutor General's Office to appeal to the Supreme Court.

In a unanimous judgment delivered on Thursday, a three-member bench of the Supreme Court set aside the lower court rulings and held that the prosecution had established sufficient grounds for the case to proceed.

The court directed the Criminal Court to continue the proceedings from the stage at which the case was dismissed if the Prosecutor General's Office refiles the case.

In its judgment, the Supreme Court held that the definition of a sexual act under Sections 9 and 35 of the Sexual Offences Act is not limited to direct physical contact.

The court said acts carried out through electronic communication that are directed at a person's body or intended to obtain sexual gratification, including the exchange of sexually explicit material without physical contact, may fall within the scope of the Act.

The judgment also stated that the messages, chat records and forensic evidence submitted in the case provided sufficient prima facie evidence of sexual intent.

According to the court, the evidence indicated that Luthfy had concealed his identity for about seven months while communicating with the complainant, resulting in the exchange of sexually explicit material.