Adanis Move US Court To Dismiss SEC Fraud Case, Call Claims ‘Extraterritorial Overreach’
In an order the court said that it had received the defendants' letter requesting a pre-motion conference on their anticipated motion to dismiss the complaint.
New York: Billionaire Gautam Adani and his nephew Sagar Adani have moved a US court to dismiss a securities fraud lawsuit filed by the US Securities and Exchange Commission, arguing that the case falls outside American jurisdiction and does not establish any wrongdoing.
In a pre-motion letter submitted ahead of a planned April 30 filing, the Adanis’ legal team challenged the SEC’s allegations linked to a 2021 bond issuance by Adani Green Energy Ltd, calling the claims legally untenable on several counts.
The SEC had initiated the lawsuit in November 2024, accusing the Adanis of misleading investors by not disclosing an alleged bribery scheme involving Indian state officials, and invoking US securities laws to pursue the case.
However, the Adanis contended that the court lacks personal jurisdiction, maintaining that neither had sufficient ties to the US or direct involvement in the bond offering. They argued that the $750 million bond sale was executed outside the US under Rule 144A and Regulation S exemptions, with securities initially sold to non-US underwriters and only later partially resold to qualified institutional buyers.
Their lawyers further stated that the SEC complaint does not allege that Gautam Adani approved the issuance, participated in key meetings, or targeted US investors.
The filing also described the case as an overreach, arguing it is impermissibly extraterritorial since the securities were not listed in the US, the issuer is an Indian entity, and the alleged misconduct took place entirely in India. Citing US Supreme Court precedent, the defence said the SEC failed to demonstrate a “domestic transaction,” a key requirement for applying US securities laws.
Additionally, the Adanis pointed out that the SEC has not claimed any investor losses, noting that the bonds matured and were fully repaid with interest in 2024.
They also rejected the bribery allegations, saying there is no credible evidence to support such claims.
The filing further argued that statements flagged by the SEC—related to ESG commitments, anti-corruption policies, and corporate reputation—constitute non-actionable “puffery,” or general corporate optimism that investors typically do not rely upon.
Finally, the defence said the SEC has failed to connect either defendant to any specific misleading statements or demonstrate intent to defraud, and has sought dismissal of the case in its entirety.
Published By : Satyaki Baidya
Published On: 8 April 2026 at 17:54 IST