Kumar Bahukhandi
Gautam Adani addresses a Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) gathering. A US federal judge has dismissed the criminal case against the industrialist after the Justice Department moved to abandon the prosecution. Photo: CII( File Photo)
Judge approves Justice Department request to end prosecution while questioning how dismissal was handled; court finds reported US investment discussions did not influence DOJ decision
IN Short
- US federal judge dismisses criminal case against Gautam Adani and Sagar Adani
- Justice Department had argued that the prosecution was legally weak and overwhelmingly centred on conduct in India
- Judge Nicholas Garaufis scrutinised the process behind the DOJ’s decision to abandon the case
- Court found reported discussions over a potential $10-billion Adani Group investment in the US did not influence the dismissal decision
- Adani welcomes the ruling, reiterating faith in truth, fairness and the rule of law
New York: A US federal judge has dismissed the criminal case against Indian billionaire Gautam Adani after the Justice Department decided to abandon its prosecution arising from allegations of bribery and securities fraud, bringing a significant legal chapter involving the Indian industrialist to an end.
US District Judge Nicholas Garaufis of the Eastern District of New York approved the government’s request for dismissal on Monday. The criminal case had included allegations that Adani and others participated in a scheme involving payments to Indian government officials connected with solar-power contracts and that US investors were subsequently misled. Adani and the Adani Group have denied wrongdoing.
Justice Department Questioned Basis of Prosecution
The dismissal followed weeks of judicial scrutiny over why the Justice Department wanted to withdraw from a prosecution that had previously been pursued by US authorities.
In defending its decision, the Justice Department argued that the case was overwhelmingly centred on alleged conduct in India and presented significant jurisdictional and evidentiary difficulties in the United States.
In its July filing, the department went unusually far in questioning the original prosecution, arguing that the charges should either have been abandoned earlier or not initiated in the first place.
Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General R. Trent McCotter argued that the criminal securities charges lacked an adequate legal foundation because the alleged misconduct had largely taken place outside the United States. The department also cited difficulties involving overseas evidence and witnesses and said the prosecution no longer aligned with its enforcement priorities.
McCotter described the decision to seek dismissal as clear rather than finely balanced and maintained that continuing the prosecution was not justified by the circumstances of the case.
Judge Scrutinises $10-Billion Investment Issue
The court nevertheless subjected the government’s request to considerable scrutiny.
One issue concerned reports that Robert Giuffra, a lawyer representing Adani who has also represented US President Donald Trump, had discussed the possibility of the Adani Group investing about $10 billion in the United States.
Judge Garaufis examined whether the investment discussions had played any role in the Justice Department’s decision to abandon the prosecution. He ultimately found that the reported investment pledge had not influenced the department’s decision to seek dismissal.
The Justice Department had separately rejected suggestions that its decision was linked to Adani Group’s proposed investments, maintaining that the prosecution would have been dropped irrespective of such discussions.
Judge Critical of How Decision Was Reached
While allowing the criminal case to end, Garaufis did not leave the Justice Department’s handling of the matter without criticism.
The judge raised concerns about the manner in which McCotter arrived at the decision, particularly the extent of consultation with defence lawyers and the apparent absence of comparable input from investigators and prosecutors who had worked on the case.
According to the court’s assessment, the process was unusual given the involvement of officials from the FBI, Securities and Exchange Commission and Justice Department in investigating or pursuing the allegations.
That distinction is significant: the court approved the dismissal sought by prosecutors, but also separately scrutinised and criticised aspects of the process through which the government reached that position.
Adani Welcomes Court Decision
Gautam Adani welcomed the development, saying his confidence in the judicial process had remained intact during the proceedings.
He said he received the US court’s decision with “humility and deep respect for the judicial process”, while expressing gratitude to those who had continued to place their faith in the group, the legal system and India’s capacity for justice.
Adani also said his faith in truth, fairness and the rule of law had remained unwavering throughout the case.
The ruling represents a major legal development for Adani, whose business interests span ports, energy, infrastructure, cement and other sectors.
What the Ruling Means
The development is important for two separate reasons. The Justice Department itself concluded that continuing the criminal prosecution was not warranted, while the judge subjected the circumstances surrounding that reversal to judicial scrutiny before allowing the case to be dismissed.
The outcome therefore closes the criminal prosecution covered by the dismissal, while the judge’s observations preserve an important distinction between ending the case and endorsing every aspect of the government’s handling of its withdrawal.
