New Delhi: After India challenged its authority to issue summonses, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has moved a federal court to bypass diplomatic channels and allow service on Gautam Adani and Sagar Adani via their US counsel and email.“The SEC does not expect service to be completed through the Hague Convention,” the agency declared in a motion filed Wednesday (January 21) before the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York, effectively abandoning the treaty-based route it has pursued since February 2025.The move marks a shift in the agency’s 14-month effort to formally notify the Indian billionaires of charges stemming from a $750 million bond offering that raised approximately $175 million from US investors. It also signals that nearly a year of back-and-forth with India’s Ministry of Law and Justice has reached a dead end.“Given the Ministry’s position, and the time elapsed since service was first attempted pursuant to the Hague Convention, the SEC does not expect service to be completed through the Hague Convention,” the agency told the court in its memorandum. “The SEC is unaware of any alternative means of serving Defendants under Indian or international law.”‘Appeared to suggest that the SEC lacks authority’On December 14, 2025, the SEC received letters from the Indian Ministry of Law and Justice, dated November 4, citing a new and unexpected objection. These letters were also attached as exhibits to the motion.The letters referenced a US regulation, Rule 5(b) of the SEC’s internal procedures, which governs how the agency initiates enforcement actions or refers matters to the Department of Justice and self-regulatory organisations. The ministry stated that “the documents have been checked and in view of the Rule 5(b) of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)’s Informal and Other Procedures, 17 C.F.R. § 202.5(b), it is found that the above mentioned summon does not cover in the above said categories.”The SEC called the objection baseless in its January 21 filing.“This objection has no basis in the Convention, which governs service procedures, not the SEC’s underlying authority to bring enforcement actions,” the agency wrote. It added that the ministry “appeared to suggest that the SEC lacks authority to invoke the Hague Convention or seek service of the Summonses,” despite the regulation having “no bearing on Hague Convention procedures.”This was the second time India’s Ministry of Law and Justice had refused to serve the documents. The first rejection came in April 2025, citing missing seals and signatures that the SEC said were not required under the Hague Convention.The commission is now seeking permission under Rule 4(f)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to serve the summonses and complaint on the Adanis through their US-based lawyers and by email to their business addresses. The agency argued this would provide “effective notice” to defendants who “know about this case and are managing their response to it”.‘Fraud’On November 20, 2024, the SEC filed a civil complaint against Gautam Adani, chairman of Adani Green Energy Ltd, and his nephew Sagar Adani, the company’s executive director, alleging they orchestrated a bribery scheme involving payments or promises totalling hundreds of millions of dollars to Indian government officials.The charges arose from a September 2021 bond offering by Adani Green that raised over $175 million from US investors. According to the SEC’s complaint, the offering materials included statements about Adani Green’s anti-corruption and anti-bribery programmes that were “materially false or misleading in light of Gautam and Sagar Adani’s conduct”.A parallel criminal case was filed the same day by the US Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, charging the Adanis and others with securities fraud conspiracy, wire fraud conspiracy, and securities fraud.The Adani Group issued a statement on November 21, 2024, calling the allegations “baseless” and vowing to pursue “all possible legal recourse”.‘No seal’The SEC’s attempts to serve the Adanis through the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters began on February 17, 2025, when it submitted formal service requests to India’s Ministry of Law and Justice, the country’s designated Central Authority under the treaty.In letters dated February 25, 2025, copies of which were attached as exhibits to the SEC’s January 21 motion, the ministry forwarded the requests to the District and Sessions Court in Ahmedabad, instructing it to “serve one set of the Request and the documents of the case on the aforesaid party(s) and to send a report on the proof of service” back to the ministry.But weeks later, on April 16, 2025, the ministry returned the requests unexecuted. In identical letters sent to SEC counsel Christopher M. Colorado, also attached as exhibits to the motion, the ministry wrote that “it is observed that the forwarding letter bears no seal & signature and the Model Form bears no seal of the requesting authority as well”.The SEC resubmitted the request on May 27, 2025 along with a letter stating that the Hague Convention requires neither a cover letter nor a seal on the model form.The agency noted in that letter that it had “records of several past Requests for Service under the Hague Service Convention that the SEC transmitted to the Indian Central Authority which were formatted identically, and which were executed without issue”. This included requests sent as recently as December 2024, which had no seals and digitally signed cover letters.The SEC also regularly sends such requests to other countries’ central authorities “without seals and with digitally signed forwarding cover letters and these requests are regularly executed without objection”.The ministry never responded. When the SEC’s Office of International Affairs sent a follow-up inquiry on April 3, 2025 asking for a status update, it had received no response. A second inquiry sent on September 12 was also met with silence.‘By email’The SEC is now asking Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis to allow service through the Adanis’ US law firms and their business email addresses.Sagar Adani has retained Hecker Fink LLP, whose attorney confirmed his representation in connection with the case on December 4, 2024. Gautam Adani has retained Kirkland & Ellis LLP and Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, whose attorneys contacted the SEC on February 28, 2025, identifying themselves as counsel for Gautam Adani “in connection with this matter”.“Service on Defendants’ established counsel is therefore ‘virtually guaranteed to provide notice to defendants’,” the SEC argued in its memorandum.The SEC also wants to serve the defendants by email at their business addresses. It said it obtained over 100 documents during its pre-complaint investigation showing that Sagar Adani used his corporate email for Adani Green business, including materials related to the bond offering and others dated as recently as March 2024.Similarly, it obtained documents confirming that Gautam Adani used his corporate email for business communications, including meeting-related correspondence concerning Adani Green, and that the address was listed in a submission to India’s securities regulator as his contact email.“Both addresses are reasonably believed to remain active and monitored,” the SEC wrote.The SEC also pointed to the defendants’ obvious awareness of the lawsuit through public statements, regulatory filings and retention of US counsel.It attached reports of Adani’s public remarks in November 2024 and June 2025 that “no one from the Adani side has been charged with any violation of the FCPA or any conspiracy to obstruct justice”.“Defendants have demonstrated their actual knowledge of this action through public statements, regulatory filings and retention of US counsel,” the SEC wrote. “Taken together, these facts confirm that Defendants are fully aware of the litigation and are actively managing their response.”