After approximately eight years of trial proceedings in one of the most high-profile celebrity cases in recent times that divided public opinion, the learned trial court, in a detailed 156-page judgment, held that the allegations of sexual harassment levelled by Meesha Shafi against Ali Zafar were not just unproven but false and defamatory and awarded general damages worth 5,000,000 to Ali Zafar for harm to reputation, dignity and mental suffering. While there are often concerns as to how harassment allegations can be proven in the absence of direct evidence, the detailed judgment appears to explain the evidence presented by Zafar and his legal team and the reasoning behind the court’s decision.
Based on extensive oral and documentary evidence spread over approximately 280 court hearings, including the testimony of around twenty witnesses, documentary record, electronic communication and cross-examination conducted over several years, the case resulted in what may be considered one of the more detailed judgments in a defamation case of this nature. This article outlines some of the major points of the judgment that led the court to categorise Shafi’s allegations as false and defamatory.
Changing Versions of Allegations
While Shafi had claimed more than one occasion in her first public statement dated 19 April 2018 on Twitter, the court record reflected inconsistencies in her narrative over time. According to witness testimony, she initially referred to only one incident when communicating with Zafar’s management representative Selina Rashid and her husband Rizwan Raees. “The defendant then said to convey a message to the plaintiff to step away from the Pepsi contracts. The defendant also mentioned that there were other people ready to come forward if the plaintiff were to not let go of the Pepsi contract. In the meeting, the defendant also told us that this incident took place at the house of plaintiff father-in-law around two and half to three years ago. On my query, the defendant only mentioned of this one incident.” Testified Rizwan Raees. The allegations later expanded to two incidents in her Instep interview dated 21 April 2018. Subsequently, a third incident was referred to in her written statement before the court. The court examined these changes in narrative as part of the evidentiary record.
Eyewitness Testimony
Multiple witnesses who were present at the relevant venues testified before the court. In relation to the jam session, nine independent eyewitnesses, including two female vocalists, testified that no incident of harassment took place in their presence. One witness, Aqsa, who was a backing vocalist at the jam session, stated: The first time when I heard regarding the allegation levelled by the Defendant against the Plaintiff, I was left shocked but when it came to my knowledge that the allegation included the jamming session of which I was a part, I at once knew that the Defendant Meesha Shafi was levelling false allegations on the Plaintiff.” Her account that no such incident occurred was corroborated by other eyewitnesses present at the session. Shafi’s own manager, Farhan, also stated in his cross-examination that he did not witness any act of harassment. During cross-examination, Shafi also stated: “Even I didn’t see it.” Another witness, Sara Razi, who was friends with both parties, testified that at a subsequent social gathering at designer Hassan Shehryar’s house, both Shafi and Zafar were present after the alleged incidents had supposedly taken place: I remember distinctly Meesha trying to cross over this bench to meet Ali. Ali had his back towards the bench and we were startled when Meesha came and met him in a very friendly manner, there was no hesitation or awkwardness on Meesha’s part. I was startled because the normal way to meet somebody is to go around the room and say hello. She decided to jump over the bench in excitement of seeing Ali. No, I did not notice any reservation on Meesha’s part towards Ali. Meesha has always been a very outspoken and bold individual.”
Documentary Evidence
The court also examined documentary evidence, including WhatsApp messages sent by Shafi two days after the jamming session, in which she described the session as: Had a great time jamming. Hectic but memorable.” She later posted her picture with Ali Zafar from the concert with the caption, “Crooning with Ali Zafar in Islamabad,” which was later deleted before the allegations were made. Meesha also shared the same picture on a WhatsApp group with the comment “Love this Picture” along with a heart emoji. Other social media posts and photographs showing her publicly sharing images with Ali Zafar and expressing positive sentiments were also considered part of the evidentiary record. A photograph was also exhibited by Zafar’s lawyer Umer Tariq Gill relating to the second alleged incident. When confronted with the photograph, Shafi stated that the picture represented the act of harassment. She was then confronted with her own verified Facebook page where she had posted the same picture herself with the caption:
“Tonight we party.” It is important to mention that this incident was not included in the Instep interview and was later added in the written statement. One of the major contradictions noted during testimony related to the narration of the first incident. Shafi had claimed that upon arriving and greeting Ali Zafar at Zafar’s father-in-law’s house, she was harassed by him, after which she immediately went outside and informed her husband, who became furious and wanted to confront Zafar. Meesha’s husband stated that she dragged him to the car. However, in cross-examination, her husband Mehmood stated: “We remained at the social gathering at plaintiff father in law house for about one or one and half hour to the best of my knowledge. It is possible that she may have been singing songs but I cannot confirm or deny because I was outside and she was inside.”
Court Conclusion
After assessing the testimony of approximately twenty witnesses along with the documentary evidence, the trial court concluded that the allegations were false and defamatory, decreed the suit in favour of Ali Zafar, and awarded damages for harm to reputation, dignity and mental suffering. The judgment appears to have relied heavily on eyewitness testimony, documentary evidence, cross-examination and inconsistencies in statements over time, which collectively formed the basis of the court’s findings.