Adani Legal Case: US SEC Seeks Alternate Route for Summons

Introduction

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has escalated its legal efforts against the Adani Group, asking a federal judge in New York for permission to use alternative methods to serve summons on Chairman Gautam Adani and his nephew, Sagar Adani. This move, reported on January 23, 2026, comes after repeated attempts to deliver the legal documents through official Indian government channels have failed, creating a significant procedural roadblock in a high-profile case involving allegations of bribery and securities fraud.

The Diplomatic Deadlock Over Summons

The SEC's frustration stems from a prolonged struggle to formally notify the Adanis of the lawsuit filed against them. The agency has been trying to serve the summons since early 2025, utilizing the Hague Service Convention, an international treaty designed to facilitate cross-border legal notifications. However, in a court filing dated January 21, 2026, the SEC stated that it "does not expect service to be completed" through this route.

The regulator detailed its efforts, explaining that it had made multiple requests to India’s Ministry of Law and Justice for assistance. These requests were reportedly met with procedural objections and delays. According to the SEC, India returned the initial requests citing minor technicalities such as missing seals and signatures. In a subsequent rejection in December 2025, Indian authorities appeared to question the SEC's authority to request the service of summons, citing internal rules that the SEC deemed irrelevant to international procedures. The SEC has described these objections as "baseless" and now argues that further attempts through the Hague Convention are unlikely to succeed.

Core Allegations in the SEC Complaint

The legal action originates from a complaint filed by the SEC in November 2024. The case centers on a $150 million bond offering conducted by Adani Green Energy Ltd in September 2021. The SEC alleges that Gautam and Sagar Adani were involved in a scheme to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in bribes to Indian officials to secure contracts for solar power projects.

The complaint further claims that the company misled U.S. investors by providing false information about its anti-graft practices while marketing the bond. Approximately $175 million of these bonds were sold to investors based in the United States. In addition to the SEC's civil action, U.S. prosecutors have launched a parallel criminal investigation into the matter, with charges including securities fraud and wire fraud conspiracy.

The SEC's Proposed Solution

Facing a stalemate, the SEC has requested permission from U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis in Brooklyn to bypass the official channels. The agency is seeking to serve the summons through what it calls "alternative measures" that are reasonably calculated to provide notice. Specifically, the SEC wants to formally notify the Adanis by serving their U.S.-based legal counsel.

The firms identified in the filing include Kirkland & Ellis LLP and Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, representing Gautam Adani, and Hecker Fink LLP, which is representing Sagar Adani. The SEC argues that the defendants are already fully aware of the proceedings, as evidenced by their retention of prominent U.S. law firms and public statements denying the allegations. The regulator also proposed sending the summons directly via email to the executives.

Market Impact on Adani Group Stocks

The news of the SEC's latest legal maneuver had an immediate negative impact on the stock prices of Adani Group companies. On Friday's trading session, shares across the conglomerate slumped to their day's lows. The market reaction reflects investor concern over the escalating legal challenges facing the group in the United States.

Adani Group's Consistent Denial

Throughout the legal proceedings, the Adani Group has consistently and strongly denied all allegations. In response to the initial charges in November 2024, the group labeled the claims as "baseless" and stated its commitment to maintaining the highest standards of governance and transparency. A spokesperson for the group has previously affirmed that it would pursue "all possible legal recourse" to defend itself and its reputation, emphasizing that the company is law-abiding and fully compliant with regulations in all jurisdictions where it operates.

What Lies Ahead

The SEC's motion places the decision in the hands of the U.S. district court. If the judge grants the request, the legal proceedings can move forward without further reliance on cooperation from Indian authorities. This development marks a critical juncture in the cross-border legal battle. The court's decision will determine whether the SEC can finally proceed with its case against two of India's most prominent business figures, setting a precedent for how U.S. regulators handle cases involving foreign nationals when diplomatic channels prove ineffective.