India Rejects Allegations from Khalistani Separatist in US Lawsuit

India Responds to US Court Allegations

New Delhi/Washington: On Tuesday, India firmly rejected the allegations made against National Security Adviser Ajit Doval and former R&AW chief Samant Goel, labeling them as 'fabricated and malicious'. These claims were brought forth in a civil lawsuit by Khalistani separatist Gurpatwant Singh Pannun in a US court.

The Indian government’s response followed the US State Department's notification that it had sent summonses related to the lawsuit to Indian officials through diplomatic channels.

External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal stated during a media briefing, "We dismiss these unfounded and malicious accusations against our senior officials, as well as the frivolous lawsuits. Any request for judicial documents in India must go through the Ministry of Law and Justice, which is our designated central authority."

The US Department of State delivered the summonses to the Indian Embassy in Washington DC on October 9.

According to the State Department, the diplomatic note was signed on September 30, 2026, and delivered on October 9, 2026.

Pannun, who serves as legal counsel for the banned organization Sikhs for Justice (SFJ), has filed the lawsuit seeking damages over an alleged assassination plot against him, claiming that Indian officials were behind it.

The SFJ is prohibited in India, and Pannun is wanted by Indian authorities for various terrorism-related charges.

In November 2023, US federal prosecutors charged Indian national Nikhil Gupta for allegedly collaborating with an Indian government employee in a failed attempt to kill Pannun in New York.

The diplomatic note clarified that the Department has no discretion in fulfilling the request from the District Court under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA).

It emphasized that the delivery of summonses should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the plaintiffs' compliance with FSIA requirements, the status of the defendants, or the validity of any claims or defenses.

Under US law, any jurisdictional or other defenses, including claims of sovereign immunity, must be presented to the court handling the case, thus it is recommended to seek legal counsel in the US.

The US government is not involved in this case and cannot represent any parties in this matter, as stated in the diplomatic note.