Jpmorgan Executive Lorna Hajdini
X via @dengeplus

A senior JPMorgan executive has filed a defamation lawsuit against a former employee who accused her of sexual assault, racial abuse and drugging, escalating a bitter legal dispute that has taken social media by storm.

The dispute stems from allegations made by Chirayu Rana, a former employee at the Wall Street bank, who has accused Lorna Hajdini of treating him like a 'sex slave' while they were colleagues. Those claims are firmly denied by both Hajdini and JPMorgan, who say no evidence of wrongdoing has been found.

The allegations first emerged publicly after Rana raised accusations of serious misconduct during his employment, which he says included sexual assault and racial abuse. The bank conducted an internal review of the claims, which it says did not support his version of events.

Now Hajdini has gone on the offensive legally, filing a countersuit for defamation in which she argues that Rana deliberately fabricated allegations and repeated them over an extended period in order to damage her reputation and exert pressure on both her and the bank.

JPMorgan Exec Says Rana Made Malicious Allegations

Hajdini's legal filing is a direct rejection of Rana's allegations. According to court documents reported by The Sun, she 'categorically and unequivocally denies each and every allegation of unlawful conduct' and describes the claims as 'entirely false, malicious and fabricated.'

Her legal team goes further, alleging that the accusations were not only untrue but intentionally constructed for personal gain. They claim the allegations were 'concocted for the improper purpose of personal enrichment at the expense of defendants and others.'

The countersuit also suggests that Rana's actions formed part of what Hajdini's lawyers describe as a pattern of behaviour, alleging he previously made similar accusations against a supervisor at another workplace. That claim has not been independently verified in court findings.

JPMorgan has publicly backed Hajdini, stating that it does not believe Rana's allegations have merit. The bank says its internal investigation included a review of emails, records and other material, and found no supporting evidence. It also claims Rana did not fully cooperate with the inquiry.

A spokesperson for the bank said it 'fully support[s] Lorna and her right to defend herself and protect her reputation,' adding that the institution had seen no basis for the allegations raised against her.

Accuser Wants to Settle

Rana's allegations include claims that Hajdini sexually assaulted him, racially abused him, and drugged him during their time working together at JPMorgan. These accusations remain unproven in court. Hajdini strongly denies them and says they have caused serious damage to her reputation.

Court filings and reporting also suggest that Rana previously tried to resolve the dispute through financial settlement discussions. He is reported to have initially sought more than $20 million (£15.7 million), although this figure has not been confirmed in any court ruling. According to the same reports, he later turned down a $1 million (£790,000) settlement offer before pursuing formal legal action.

Instead of settling, the conflict escalated. Rana's allegations moved from internal complaints within the company to public accusations and then into ongoing legal proceedings. His legal position has remained that the claims are valid, and he continues to stand by them. No court has made a ruling confirming or rejecting his allegations.

In response, Hajdini's legal team argues that Rana's actions were not just about raising concerns, but were also aimed at pressuring both her and JPMorgan into a financial payout. JPMorgan maintains that the process was properly conducted and concluded.

Rana, however, disputes this outcome and continues to maintain that his treatment at the bank was abusive. His claims remain part of an active defamation and counter-litigation process, meaning neither side has been legally vindicated.

As of now, there are no confirmed new court rulings or publicly verified procedural updates beyond the ongoing legal filings and statements already reported. The case remains open, with both parties holding firm positions and preparing for further legal feud.

Writer's Pick