Adani Group shares slide up to 15% after SEC moves court to serve direct summons

News of the US market regulator seeking to send summons in a bribery case directly to Adani Group promoter Gautam Adani and his nephew Sagar sent the group’s listed stocks tumbling between 3% and 15% on Friday.

Mint’s calculations show the stocks cumulatively lost nearly a tenth of their value, which translates into a market capitalization loss of over ₹1.1 trillion.

Shares of Adani Green Energy Ltd, the company which is supposed to have benefited from the alleged bribery, plunged 14.6%. Among other stocks, shares of Adani Energy Solutions ended 12% down, flagship Adani Enterprises Ltd fell 10.7%, Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone 7.5%, and Adani Power declined 5.5%. Other Adani Group firms also fell 3-5%.

To be sure, the share price fall comes amidst a wider market selloff, with the benchmark Sensex falling 0.94%.

The market value loss comes just a day before the third anniversary of the publishing of the damning report by now-shuttered American short-seller Hindenburg Research. That report, which alleged financial manipulation at the Adani Group, had resulted in nearly all of the group stocks touching the lower circuit. The Adani Group had denied all allegations made by Hindenburg.

On Thursday, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) asked a federal court for permission to personally email summons to billionaire Gautam Adani and his nephew, Sagar Adani, after the US market regulator claimed that India’s ministry of law and justice rejected its request twice in the last 14 months.

American laws require that the summons and a copy of the complaint be delivered in person to the accused to apprise them of the case against them. The SEC has claimed that since the Adani group chairman has publicly commented on the case and both him and Sagar Adani have also hired law firms to represent them, it can be assumed they are aware of the charges against them. Thus, they are seeking the court’s nod to use alternative methods to serve summons to them - via email and through their US counsels.

“Gautam Adani has commented publicly on this matter repeatedly, including at Adani Group’s June 2025 Annual General Meeting,” SEC’s counsel Christopher M. Colorado wrote in a filing dated 21 January 2026.

“Defendants have also retained multiple US law firms who have communicated with the SEC on Defendants’ behalf during this litigation,” he wrote.

Taken together, these facts confirm “that Defendants are fully aware of the litigation and are actively managing their response”, Colorado wrote. Thus, the service of summons by delivery to the Adanis’ attorneys and by email directly to them would be fully consistent with due process, he argued.

According to the SEC disclosure, Sagar Adani has hired Hecker Fink LLP, while Gautam Adani has hired both Kirkland & Ellis LLP and Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP.

Hecker Fink, based in multiple US cities, confirmed its representation to the SEC on 4 December 2024, while Kirkland & Ellis LLP and Quinn Emanuel, both multinational law firms with offices in multiple US cities, informed the SEC about their representation on 28 February 2025.

The three law firms did not immediately respond to Mint’s request for a comment.

Queries to India’s ministry of law and justice and the Adani Group did not immediately elicit a response.

What lawyers are saying

“In practical terms, this is a procedural but important step: it would allow the SEC to formally complete service, start the clock for the defendants to enter appearance and respond, and enable the civil enforcement case to move forward on merits,” said Ketan Mukhija, partner and co-head for PE & VC at law firm Kochhar & Co., adding that if the defendants ignore the summons, they risk a one-sided judgement.

The immediate implication of this for the Adanis would be increased legal and commercial pressure — they would have to defend themselves in the US court, with potential consequences including financial penalties, restrictions on participation in US securities markets, and reputational and fundraising impact for the group, Mukhija said.

Russel A Stamets, partner at law firm Circle Of Counsels, argued that the SEC request to allow alternative service was simply a show to let the two countries work out how they will handle this sensitive situation involving one of the most important economic actors of India.

“While the criminal charges are extremely serious and well-pled, this new move is as much about the current trade dispute as any desire by the Trump administration to re-energize anti-corruption enforcement,” Stamets said.

The Trump administration would not leave leverage like this indictment on the table when it can be used to advance US interests, the New Delhi-based lawyer said.

Procedural roadblock

The department of legal affairs under the ministry of law and justice twice rejected the SEC’s request for assistance in serving summons to the Adani kin, citing procedural issues.

The SEC first sought formal assistance through a letter in February 2025, which the ministry returned in April that year, citing the absence of a signature or seal of the serving authority. The SEC responded the same month, stating that under the Hague Convention no such signature or seal is required. However, the ministry again returned the request in December 2025, saying that the SEC’s own rules do not cover summons in the case pertaining to the Adanis.

“These responses demonstrate that further attempts through the Hague Convention are unlikely to succeed and therefore warrant granting leave for alternative service…,” the SEC said in its court filing.

The Hague Convention—signed by 90 countries, including India and the United States—allows legal documents from foreign law enforcement and regulatory agencies to be served on citizens of another country through a designated nodal authority. In India, this role is performed by the Department of Legal Affairs under the Ministry of Law and Justice.

Bribery allegations

On 20 November 2024, US prosecutors claimed that $250 million in bribes were paid to unnamed Indian officials in exchange for favourable terms on solar power contracts awarded to Adani Green Energy Ltd and Azure Power Global Ltd, another New Delhi-headquartered firm. The Federal prosecutors indicted a total of eight individuals for allegedly paying more than $250 million in bribes to Indian government officials between 2020 and 2024 to obtain lucrative solar-energy contracts.

According to the indictment, Adani Green Energy Ltd raised $2 billion from American and foreign investors based on false and misleading statements about the firm's anti-corruption and anti-bribery efforts. For this reason, the US Department of Justice (DoJ) opened a criminal investigation, while the SEC is pursuing a civil investigation against Gautam Adani, Sagar Adani and the then Adani Green Energy chief executive Vneet Jaain.

The US indictment of one of India's richest businessmen, Gautam Adani, whose net worth totalled $59.9 billion as of 23 January according to Forbes rich index list, is one of the most high-profile cases in recent years.

Ahmedabad-based Adani conglomerate counts 13 listed companies, including ACC Ltd and Orient Cement, which are soon to be merged into Ambuja Cements Ltd.

The Adani Group denied the allegations, calling them “baseless” and reaffirming its commitment to maintaining the highest standards of governance and compliance.“The allegations made by the US Department of Justice and the US Securities and Exchange Commission against directors of Adani Green are baseless and denied,” the Adani Group said in a statement in November 2024.

“The Adani Group has always upheld and is steadfastly committed to maintaining the highest standards of governance, transparency and regulatory compliance across all jurisdictions of its operations. We assure our stakeholders, partners and employees that we are a law-abiding organisation, fully compliant with all laws.”

Frosty bilateral relations

The SEC filing comes at a time when the bilateral relationship between India and the US has turned frosty due to diverging national interests and US’ imposition of steep tariffs on Indian goods.

The US wants India to stop buying Russian oil, which it claims is funding the country’s war with Ukraine. Meanwhile, India wants the US, its largest export partner, to remove the recently-imposed 50% tariffs.

In the background, diplomats from both nations are busy stitching together a trade deal that would serve the interests of their local businesses without affecting sensitive industries like dairy and agriculture.