Adani Stocks Slide as U.S. Regulators Push to Serve Summons in High-Stakes Bribery Case

Shares of several Adani Group companies tumbled sharply on Friday after fresh U.S. court filings revealed that the Securities and Exchange Commission is seeking to formally serve legal summons on group founder Gautam Adani and his nephew, Sagar Adani, escalating a case that has weighed heavily on investor confidence in the Indian conglomerate.

Adani Group stocks fell between 5% and 13% in Mumbai trading, with the sharpest losses seen in Adani Green Energy, which closed nearly 14% lower. The group’s flagship firm, Adani Enterprises, slid 10.7%, while Adani Power ended the session down 5.7%, underscoring how developments in the U.S. legal process are quickly feeding through to market sentiment at home.

According to the filings, the SEC has approached U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis in Brooklyn to seek permission to issue a summons to Gautam Adani, chairman of the Adani Group, and Sagar Adani, executive director of Adani Green Energy. The regulator is attempting to advance its civil case after India’s Ministry of Law and Justice declined on two occasions last year to deliver the summons under the Hague Convention, a key international framework for serving legal documents across borders.

In its submission to the court, the SEC said Indian authorities appeared to argue that the U.S. regulator lacked the authority to invoke the Hague Convention or to seek service of the summons in this manner. That refusal has slowed the progress of the case and highlights the legal and diplomatic complexities that arise when U.S. enforcement actions intersect with powerful business figures operating primarily outside American jurisdiction.

The civil case runs alongside criminal charges filed in November 2024, when Gautam Adani and seven other individuals were indicted in New York federal court over what prosecutors described as a wide-ranging bribery and fraud scheme. U.S. authorities allege that Adani and other executives paid more than $250 million in bribes to Indian government officials to secure solar power supply contracts that ultimately generated more than $2 billion in profits.

Regulators say Adani Group executives misled U.S. and international investors about the company’s adherence to anti-bribery and anti-corruption standards while raising more than $3 billion in capital to finance those energy projects. The alleged misconduct strikes at the heart of investor disclosures, a core concern for the SEC, particularly when foreign companies tap global capital markets that include U.S.-based funds and institutions.

The sharp selloff on Friday reflects renewed anxiety among investors that the legal overhang facing the group is far from resolved. While Adani companies have spent the past year trying to stabilize their balance sheets, reassure lenders, and rebuild trust after earlier controversies, the latest court filings signal that U.S. regulators remain intent on pursuing accountability, even in the face of jurisdictional resistance.

The episode also illustrates a broader tension in cross-border enforcement. From Washington’s perspective, access to U.S. capital markets brings with it obligations to comply with American securities laws, regardless of where a company is headquartered. From New Delhi’s standpoint, repeated refusals to serve summons suggest unease about the extraterritorial reach of U.S. regulators, particularly when cases involve prominent Indian nationals and companies central to domestic infrastructure and energy policy.

The immediate impact has been financial and reputational for the Adani Group. The steep drop in share prices adds pressure on market capitalization and could complicate future fundraising, especially for capital-intensive businesses such as renewable energy and power generation. Longer term, the outcome of the U.S. proceedings could shape how global investors price governance risk across Indian conglomerates with international exposure.

Investors are likely to remain sensitive to any sign of progress or pushback as the legal process unfolds, aware that its implications extend beyond a single group to questions of regulatory reach, investor protection, and the rules governing global capital flows.