Blocked by Modi govt for 14 months, US SEC moves court to serve summons to Adani through email
New Delhi: The United States Securities and Exchange Commission has approached a federal court in New York seeking permission to bypass diplomatic channels and serve summonses on industrialist Gautam Adani and his nephew Sagar Adani through their US-based lawyers and email, after India challenged the SEC’s authority to issue the summonses.
In a motion filed on Wednesday, January 21, before the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York, the SEC said it no longer expects service to be completed under the Hague Convention, effectively abandoning the treaty route it has been pursuing since February 2025. The case is being heard by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis.
“The SEC does not expect service to be completed through the Hague Convention,” the regulator stated in its filing, adding that nearly a year of exchanges with India’s Ministry of Law and Justice had failed to yield results. The SEC said it was unaware of any alternative method of serving the summonses under Indian or international law.
The move marks a significant shift in the SEC’s 14-month effort to formally notify Gautam Adani, Chairman of Adani Green Energy Ltd, and Sagar Adani, its Executive Director, of civil charges linked to a September 2021 bond offering. The offering raised approximately $175 million from US investors as part of a larger $750 million issuance.
According to the SEC, the diplomatic impasse became clear after it received letters from India’s Ministry of Law and Justice on December 14, 2025, dated November 4. These letters cited Rule 5(b) of the SEC’s internal procedures and stated that the summonses did not fall within the categories covered by that rule. The ministry’s objection, which was attached as an exhibit to the SEC’s motion, appeared to question the regulator’s authority to issue the summonses.
The SEC rejected this reasoning as unfounded, arguing that Rule 5(b) has no relevance to service of documents under the Hague Convention. “This objection has no basis in the Convention, which governs service procedures, not the SEC’s underlying authority to bring enforcement actions,” the agency told the court. It added that the ministry’s position seemed to suggest that the SEC lacked authority to invoke the Hague Convention itself, despite the regulation cited having no bearing on treaty procedures.
This was the second time the Indian ministry declined to execute the service request. In April 2025, it had returned the documents unserved, citing the absence of seals and signatures. The SEC responded by stating that the Hague Convention does not require either a seal or a forwarding letter. It also noted that it had successfully served similar requests on Indian authorities in the past, including as recently as December 2024, using identical formats.
The SEC said it resubmitted the request on May 27, 2025, clarifying the treaty requirements, but received no response. Follow-up inquiries sent by its Office of International Affairs in April and September 2025 also went unanswered.
In light of this, the SEC has now asked the court to permit service under Rule 4(f)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which allows alternative methods when conventional channels fail. The regulator is seeking approval to serve the summonses and complaint through the Adanis’ US counsel and via their business email addresses, arguing that this would ensure effective notice.
Sagar Adani is represented in the matter by Hecker Fink LLP. An attorney from the firm confirmed his representation on December 4, 2024. Gautam Adani has retained Kirkland & Ellis LLP and Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP. Lawyers from these firms contacted the SEC on February 28, 2025, identifying themselves as counsel for Gautam Adani in connection with the case.
“Service on Defendants’ established counsel is therefore virtually guaranteed to provide notice to defendants,” the SEC said in its memorandum.
The agency also sought permission to serve the summonses by email, stating that its investigation had uncovered more than 100 documents showing Sagar Adani’s use of his corporate email account for Adani Green Energy business, including communications related to the bond offering and others dated as recently as March 2024. It said similar records showed that Gautam Adani regularly used his corporate email for business communications, including correspondence linked to Adani Green, and that the address was listed as his contact email in filings with India’s securities regulator.
“Both addresses are reasonably believed to remain active and monitored,” the SEC said.
The civil case stems from a complaint filed by the SEC on November 20, 2024, alleging that Gautam and Sagar Adani orchestrated a bribery scheme involving payments or promises amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars to Indian government officials. According to the regulator, the bond offering materials contained statements about Adani Green’s anti-corruption and anti-bribery practices that were materially false or misleading in light of the alleged conduct.
On the same day, the US Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York filed parallel criminal charges against the Adanis and others, including securities fraud conspiracy, wire fraud conspiracy and securities fraud.
The Adani Group, in a statement issued on November 21, 2024, rejected the allegations as baseless and said it would pursue all available legal remedies.
In its latest filing, the SEC also pointed to public statements and regulatory disclosures made by the Adanis to argue that they are fully aware of the proceedings. It cited remarks made by Gautam Adani in November 2024 and June 2025 claiming that no one from the Adani side had been charged with violations of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act or obstruction of justice.
“Defendants have demonstrated their actual knowledge of this action through public statements, regulatory filings and retention of US counsel,” the SEC said, adding that the defendants were actively managing their response to the litigation.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
NCP condemns article on Ajit Pawar; NCP (SP) leader says merger issue 'closed' by party
Mumbai (PTI): NCP and NCP (SP) leaders on Saturday sharpened their attacks on each other with regards to the merger process of the two factions as well as an article written on Ajit Pawar, who died in a plane crash on January 28.
While NCP leader Anand Paranjpe sought an apology for the article, claiming it maligned Pawar even after his death, the NCP (SP) state unit chief Shashikant Shinde, who incidentally wrote the article in party mouthpiece 'Rashtravadi', said the merger issue had been closed by the Sharad Pawar-led outfit.
The final decision on a merger was to take place after the local body polls and its framework was to be decided through discussions, Shinde told reporters.
ALSO READ: Minor inside polling booth: Maharashtra SEC orders action against election official, cop
There is no point in discussing the possible merger of the two parties now as "there is no leader left to hold discussions" (post Ajit Pawar's death), Shinde added.
"The issue has been closed by the NCP (SP)," Shinde asserted.
Shinde said a perception was being created that his faction was aggressively pushing for a merger, which was not correct, and maintained that the party had now decided to focus on rebuilding itself.
Referring to his article, Shinde said he had not claimed that Ajit Pawar made a mistake. "I only said he wanted to rectify the division of the party," the NCP (SP) MLC clarified.
Meanwhile, Nationalist Congress Party spokesperson Anand Paranjpe condemned Shinde's article and sought an apology on behalf of the departed leader's kin.
The article contained "false and misleading" claims about the circumstances in which Ajit Pawar left the undivided NCP, he said.
ALSO READ: PM witnesses special IAF aerial show at emergency landing facility in Assam
"Attempts are being made to malign his image even after his demise. An apology must be tendered to Deputy Chief Minister Sunetra Pawar and her family members. Party workers will give a befitting reply to these allegations," Paranjpe said.
In a tribute published in the February 2026 edition of party magazine 'Rashtravadi', Shinde had claimed "manoeuvres by invisible forces, threats, and a web of false allegations" created a situation that compelled Ajit Pawar to step out of the parent organisation, leading to the split in the Sharad Pawar-founded party.
Rejecting claims Ajit Pawar left the party due to "conspiracies or pressure", Paranjpe said the former had consistently advocated an alliance with the BJP during internal discussions over the years.
Paranjpe criticised the timing of merger talks raised by NCP (SP) soon after Ajit Pawar's death calling it politically insensitive.
He reiterated that party leaders Praful Patel and Sunil Tatkare have already clarified that the issue of merger is not on the party agenda at present.
ALSO READ: Paris police shoot, injure knife-wielding man who tried to attack officers at Arc de Triomphe
The bitter exchange comes amid tensions between the two factions following Ajit Pawar's demise, with both sides taking differing positions on the issue of reunification and the legacy of the late leader.
Senior NCP leader and state minister Chhagan Bhujbal wondered what is the need to have a merger discussion on a daily basis.
"Sunetra Pawar is now the Deputy CM and will soon by the NCP national president. She will discuss the matter and take a call," he said.
Bhujbal slammed the daily speculation related to merger talks.
"When Sunetra Pawar was sworn in as deputy Cm, there was criticism about the haste. Why is there a haste in talking about the merger," Bhujbal questioned.
_vb_56.jpeg)
