Skip to content

Condition: Post with Page_List

Listen
Search
Please enter at least 3 characters.

Latest Stories

Did he make it up? Shocking JPMorgan sex crime suit retracted

J.P. Morgan Tokyo Office Exterior
Tokyo, Japan - June 18, 2025: Low angle view of the J.P. Morgan Tokyo office, part of the J.P. Morgan Asset Management division, and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Tokyo Branch, located at Tokyo Building.
Getty Images


A New York lawsuit accusing JPMorgan Chase executive Lorna Hajdini of coercing a former junior banker into months of non-consensual sex acts, drugging him and threatening his career with racial slurs has been retracted and called a fabrication by the bank.

The civil complaint was filed April 28 in New York County Supreme Court under the pseudonym “John Doe.” It named 37-year-old Hajdini, an executive director in JPMorgan’s leveraged finance division, along with the bank. The suit alleged the misconduct began in spring 2024 and continued for months, with claims that Hajdini used workplace power to intimidate the married plaintiff and retaliated after he reported the behavior internally.

The plaintiff was later identified as Chirayu Rana, 35, who worked on the same leveraged finance team but did not report directly to Hajdini.

Rana left JPMorgan in late 2024 and filed an internal harassment complaint in May 2025 seeking a multimillion-dollar severance, which was rejected. He now works as a principal at investment firm Bregal Sagemount.

JPMorgan’s internal investigation reviewed emails, phone records and conducted employee interviews. The bank found no evidence supporting the allegations. A spokesperson said numerous employees cooperated, but Rana refused to participate or provide key facts central to his claims.

“Following an investigation, we don’t believe there’s any merit to these claims,” the bank stated.

Hajdini categorically denied the allegations through her attorneys, saying she never engaged in any inappropriate conduct with Rana and had never visited the location where some acts were alleged to have occurred. The original court filing was withdrawn for “corrections” shortly after details went viral.

No criminal charges have been filed. The episode highlights how quickly unproven civil claims can spread online before facts emerge.