+
 
For the best experience, open
m.thewire.in
on your mobile browser or Download our App.

US SEC Seeks Indian Govt’s Assistance To Summon Adani in Bribery Case

The SEC has requested assistance from the Union law ministry, the central authority for India under the Hague Service Convention, the agency told a New York court.
Gautam Adani. Photo: X/@GautamAdani.
Support Free & Independent Journalism

Good morning, we need your help!

Since 2015, The Wire has fearlessly delivered independent journalism, holding truth to power.

Despite lawsuits and intimidation tactics, we persist with your support. Contribute as little as ₹ 200 a month and become a champion of free press in India.

New Delhi: The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) informed a New York court that it has sought assistance from the Indian government under a multilateral treaty to deliver summons to billionaire Gautam Adani and his nephew Sagar Adani in a securities and wire fraud case.

At a press conference during his US visit, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had dodged a question on the accusations by US prosecutors against Adani, stating that it was a “personal matter”.

In an update to the Eastern District of New York on Wednesday (February 18), the SEC provided details on its civil case against the two Adanis, filed in November 2024, accusing them of misleading US investors with false claims during a 2021 debt offering by Adani Green Energy Limited.

Separately, a case alleging violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) has been filed against Cabanes, a former director of Azure Power, whose stock was traded on the New York Stock Exchange until November 2023.

The US Attorney for the Eastern District of New York has also filed a related criminal case against Adani and seven others, alleging conspiracies to commit securities and wire fraud. Five of them – two former Adani executives and three former Canadian institutional investors – were additionally charged with conspiracy to violate the FCPA in connection with an alleged $250 million bribery scheme to secure solar energy supply contracts.

“SEC staff has contacted Defendants or their counsel (to the extent SEC staff is aware of such counsel) and has sent them Notices of Lawsuit and Requests for Waiver of Service of Summons, including copies of the Complaint. Additionally, under Article 5(a) of the Hague Service Convention, the SEC has requested assistance from India’s Ministry of Law and Justice, the Central Authority for India under the Hague Service Convention,” the agency stated in a letter dated February 18.

Noting that the “process is ongoing,” the SEC said it will continue efforts “to serve Defendants in India by the methods prescribed by FRCP 4(f), including under the Hague Service Convention, and will keep the Court apprised of its progress.” Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governs the issuance and delivery of summons.

India acceded to the “Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters” in 2006. But it had inserted caveats to its accession which stated that “service of judicial documents through diplomatic or consular channels will be limited to nationals of the State in which the documents originate”.

India also did not accept Article 10 of the Hague Convention, which permits the service of judicial documents via postal channels or direct delivery through judicial officers.

On February 10, the Trump administration paused enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) for 180 days. The FCPA prohibits companies and individuals with US ties from bribing foreign government officials for business advantage and criminalises misleading investors about FCPA compliance.

Under the executive order, the attorney general must review “all existing FCPA investigations or enforcement actions” and take steps “to restore proper bounds on FCPA enforcement,” according to the order.

Additionally, five Republican lawmakers wrote to Attorney General Pam Bondi, raising concerns over certain “unwise decisions” made by the Biden administration. They questioned the case, arguing that “this case rests on the allegation that preparations were made by members of this company in India to bribe Indian officials, also exclusively located in India”.

Make a contribution to Independent Journalism
facebook twitter