Special Correspondent
- Appeal rejected; Raja’s allegations declared false and defamatory
• £50,000 damages plus £260,000 interim costs, further costs to follow
• 28-day court-approved apology to be published prominently across all platforms
• Permanent injunction bars repetition of all defamatory claims
• Violation may lead to fines or imprisonment
• Payments due by 22 December 2025
ISLAMABAD: The High Court in London has rejected Adil Raja’s application for permission to appeal its earlier judgment and reaffirmed that his accusations against Brigadier (retd) Rashid Naseer were wholly untrue, baseless and driven by malice.
The dispute started in June 2022, when Raja publicly made a series of allegations against Naseer, claiming involvement in manipulating the Punjab election, secret meetings, misuse of authority, and corruption. Naseer responded by filing a defamation suit in the UK High Court, insisting that the accusations were false and aimed at tarnishing his reputation.
The case proceeded over several years. In October 2025, the High Court delivered its initial judgment in favour of Naseer, declaring all allegations baseless and ordering £50,000 in damages along with interim legal costs. Following this, Raja sought permission to appeal the ruling. The Court reviewed the request in December 2025 and firmly refused it, issuing an enforcement order, which confirmed the damages, legal costs, injunction, and requirement for a public apology.
In its detailed enforcement order, the Court held that Raja’s June 2022 allegations constituted deliberate defamation aimed at harming the claimant’s reputation, carrying no factual basis or lawful defence. Raja must now pay £50,000 in libel damages and deposit £260,000 as interim costs, with additional costs to be assessed. All financial obligations are due by 22 December 2025.
The High Court also directed Raja to publish a clear and prominently displayed summary of the judgment, including a formal apology, across all his platforms for 28 days, with the summary and link remaining visible at the top of each platform.
A strict injunction prohibits Raja from repeating or hinting at a wide range of previous allegations, including claims about Punjab elections, meetings, rigging operations, misuse of authority, corruption, threats, or regime-change narratives. The judgment terms these claims “a collection of falsehoods” intended for character assassination.
The Court further ruled that any breach of the injunction would amount to contempt, exposing Raja to fines or imprisonment. Sensitive categories of allegations listed in the judgment are completely banned from future publication or reference.
