LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) upheld a trial court order restraining singer Meesha Shafi from making statements related to sexual harassment allegations against actor-cum-singer Ali Zafar until the conclusion of the defamation suit filed by Zafar against Shafi.
In its written order, Justice Ahmad Nadeem Arshad noted that without evidence, the veracity of the sexual harassment allegations could not be determined. He stated that public statements during the ongoing lawsuit could constitute a “parallel media trial,” which is neither permissible nor desirable for fair adjudication.
The judge dismissed Shafi’s plea to challenge the gag order issued by the trial court on January 24, 2019. Zafar had claimed that the sexual harassment allegations were false and harmed his reputation. He sought an interim injunction to prevent Shafi from making further public statements about the matter.
Previously, the trial court had accepted Zafar’s application for an interim injunction, prohibiting Shafi from making any statement related to the defamation suit until its resolution. During arguments, Shafi’s counsel argued that an injunction was not warranted in a defamation case. Zafar’s counsel countered by highlighting the irreparable harm to his reputation through public statements made by Shafi.
Justice Arshad upheld the trial court order on these grounds. He observed that there was no “absolute bar” under the law against granting injunctions in defamation cases and held that such protection might be justified in exceptional circumstances to safeguard reputation from irreparable damage. He cited cases indicating that once a person’s reputation is damaged, it cannot be fully restored through monetary compensation.
Arshad ruled that Zafar’s case presented “serious triable issues requiring evidence” since the material on record indicated possible falsehoods about his sexual harassment allegations. Therefore, Shafi could not be left without protection during the trial proceedings.
The judge emphasized that for a public figure whose career and livelihood depend on public trust and perception, continuous circulation of unproven allegations would cause irreparable harm to his reputation and dignity. He stated that if found untrue, such allegations directly impacted Zafar’s professional credibility and honor.
Justice Arshad also held that the order did not violate freedom of expression as it was subject to reasonable restrictions balanced with Shafi’s right to dignity. He ruled on a temporary basis, emphasizing the balance between protecting Shafi from further harm and ensuring fair judicial proceedings.
Additionally, Arshad directed the trial court to expedite Zafar’s defamation suit within 30 days. He dismissed Shafi’s petition but also noted her rights to make statements once the matter was decided in his favor.