Khalistani separatist Gurpatwant Singh Pannun filed a civil action in a US court against National Security Advisor Ajit Doval and former R&AW chief Samant Goel. India denounced the accusations as "fabricated and malicious" on Tuesday.
The US State Department claimed to have transmitted the court's summonses to the officials involved in the litigation to the Indian side through a diplomatic note, which prompted New Delhi's comments.
"We reject the fabricated and malicious attacks on our high officials. Also we reject the frivolous lawsuits. A request for serving of judicial documents in India can only be routed through India's designated central authority that is the Ministry of Law and Justice," External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said at a regular media briefing.
Also Read | Layoffs Are Rising In Tech, But These Skills Are Helping People Unlock Better Pay
ALSO READ: Budget 2027 Expectations: LTCG Tax Removal To LNG Duty Waiver — Five Key Demands By PHDCCI
The summonses were served through diplomatic channels to the Indian Embassy in Washington DC by the US Department of State on October 9.
"The diplomatic note was signed on September 30, 2026, and delivered on October 9, 2026," the State Department said.
Pannun, legal counsel for the banned group Sikhs for Justice (SFJ), filed the lawsuit seeking damages over an alleged plot to assassinate him.
He has accused the Indian officials of orchestrating the plan.
The SFJ is a banned organisation in India, while Pannun is wanted by Indian investigative agencies in connection with multiple terror-related charges.
In November 2023, US federal prosecutors charged Indian national Nikhil Gupta with conspiring with an Indian government employee in an alleged plot to assassinate Pannun in New York.
"The Department has no discretion in carrying out this request from the District Court under the FSIA," the diplomatic note said, referring to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA).
The transmission of the summonses does not indicate that the United States has taken any position on whether the plaintiffs have met all the legal requirements under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). It also does not reflect its views on the status of any defendant, whether the summonses were properly served, or the merits of the claims or defences involved.
ALSO READ: Why Couple Earning Rs 7.2 Lakh A Month Is Saying No To A Rs 4 Crore Bengaluru Home
Under US law, any jurisdictional or other defence, including a claim of sovereign immunity, must be raised before the court hearing the case. Therefore, seeking legal advice from an attorney in the US is recommended.
The US government is not a party to this case and cannot represent other parties in this matter, the diplomatic note said.
Essential Business Intelligence, Sharp Market Insights, Practical Personal Finance Advice, Daily Fuel, Gold and Silver Prices and Latest Stories — On NDTV Profit.
