World2 min(s) read
Published 08:47 01 May 2026 GMT
Ex-JPMorgan banker 'unmasked' after he accused exec of turning him into 'office sex slave' and making him cry in scathing lawsuit
A former JPMorgan Chase employee has been identified by sources as the man behind a shocking lawsuit accusing a senior executive of sexual abuse — claims the bank says are completely baseless.
Chirayu Rana, 35, now a principal at Bregal Sagemount, is alleged to be the “John Doe” who filed the case earlier this week against executive director Lorna Hajdini.
In the now-infamous filing, Rana claimed Hajdini turned him into her “sex slave,” alleging she drugged him with Rohypnol and Viagra and threatened to slash his bonus if he didn’t comply.
The allegations quickly made headlines after The Daily Mail published details from court documents that have since been withdrawn for “corrections.” Among the more extreme claims: that Hajdini allegedly showed up unannounced at his apartment and forced him into sex — a claim Hajdini has flatly denied.
“Lorna categorically denies the allegations. She never engaged in any inappropriate conduct with this individual of any kind and has never even been to the location where the alleged sexual assault supposedly took place,” her lawyers said in a statement.
Who is Chirayu Rana?
Rana, who hasn’t responded to requests for comment, claims the alleged incidents began shortly after he joined the bank’s leveraged finance team in 2024.
He later filed an internal complaint in May 2025, accusing the firm of discrimination and abuse of power, and, according to sources, attempted to negotiate a payout worth “millions” to leave.
The lawsuit also accuses JPMorgan of retaliation and failing to properly investigate. But the bank says that’s simply not true.
The company's stance on the allegations
“Following an investigation, we don’t believe there’s any merit to these claims,” a spokesperson said, adding: “While numerous employees cooperated with the investigation, the complainant refused to participate and has declined to provide facts that would be central to support his allegations.”
Sources also told The Post that Rana and Hajdini weren’t even in a direct reporting line, meaning she wouldn’t have had control over his bonus in the first place.
While one colleague described Rana as “socially awkward,” others defended Hajdini as a “top performer,” with one ally claiming: “He has tarnished her with a complete fabrication.”
No trial date has been set, and the case remains ongoing, but it’s already raising serious questions about what really happened behind the scenes.