US court dismisses criminal case against Gautam Adani, billionaire hails decision

A US court has dismissed with prejudice the criminal charges against Adani Group chairman Gautam Adani, his nephew Sagar Adani and former Adani Green Energy CEO Vneet Jaain, bringing an end to nearly two years of proceedings in an alleged bribery and securities-fraud case.

The US District Court for the Eastern District of New York approved the Justice Department’s Rule 48(a) motion to dismiss the indictment against the three defendants. The charges included conspiracy to commit securities fraud, conspiracy to commit wire fraud and securities fraud.

Judge Nicholas Garaufis approved the dismissal after seeking additional explanations from federal prosecutors about their decision to abandon the case. A dismissal with prejudice permanently ends the criminal proceedings and prevents the charges from being filed again. However, it does not amount to a judicial finding that the underlying allegations were proven or disproven.

Gautam Adani hails case dismissal

Reacting to the development, Gautam Adani hailed the court ruling in a post on X.

“I welcome the US court’s decision with humility and deep respect for the judicial process. Throughout this challenging period, our faith in truth, fairness and the rule of law remained unwavering. My deepest gratitude to those who never lost faith in us, in the system and in India’s capacity for justice. We will continue doing what matters: building for our nation, creating value that outlasts us and serving a purpose larger than ourselves,” he said.

About the case

The criminal case was filed in November 2024, when US prosecutors accused Gautam Adani, Sagar Adani, Vneet Jaain and others of participating in a scheme to pay approximately USD 250 million in bribes to Indian government officials to secure solar power contracts.

Prosecutors alleged that the contracts were expected to generate more than USD 2 billion in after-tax profits over a period of two decades. They also accused the defendants of misleading investors while raising more than USD 3 billion through loans and bond offerings in US markets.

The Adani Group consistently denied the allegations, calling them baseless and maintaining that it had complied with applicable laws and regulatory requirements.

The US Securities and Exchange Commission’s separate civil case has also been resolved through a final judgment against Gautam Adani. He consented to the judgment without admitting the allegations.

Under the order, Adani is required to pay a $6 million civil penalty to the SEC within 30 days.

Why Trump administration sought dismissal

In court filings, the Trump administration argued that continuing the prosecution no longer served the interests of justice. The Justice Department cited jurisdictional and evidentiary challenges, the fact that most of the alleged conduct occurred in India, prior examination of the matter by Indian authorities, the absence of identified investor losses and broader public-interest considerations.

The Justice Department also argued that the indictment, which was unsealed in November 2024 during the final weeks of the Biden administration, had little realistic prospect of reaching trial and appeared to be a politically motivated “name and shame” exercise.

Before granting the motion, Judge Garaufis ordered the government to publicly explain its reasons for seeking dismissal. He also required the defendants to submit sworn declarations confirming that there had been no promise, offer, quid pro quo or undisclosed agreement linked to the government’s decision.

In his sworn declaration, Gautam Adani categorically denied any such arrangement.

After reviewing the government’s submissions and the defendants’ declarations, the court approved the motion and permanently dismissed the case.

Court cites legal risk over compliance statements

The court found that the Justice Department had established sufficient grounds for dismissal based on its argument that certain statements concerning Adani Green’s anti-bribery policies and corporate compliance could constitute “inactionable puffery” — broad statements that investors could not reasonably be expected to rely upon.

Judge Garaufis rejected or found insufficient several other grounds cited by the government. These included its argument that the alleged misconduct occurred predominantly in India and therefore raised significant jurisdictional questions under US securities laws.

The court noted that the indictment itself alleged that investors committed funds in the United States and that the transactions involved the US financial system.

The judge also found that the government’s argument concerning the absence of deception involving sophisticated investors did not provide sufficient grounds for dismissal. However, he said it was unnecessary to decide that issue because the puffery rationale was sufficient to dispose of the three charges.

The dismissal brings the criminal proceedings to an end before a trial could take place. No witnesses were examined, evidence was not tested in court and the judge made no findings on the underlying criminal allegations.

Because the dismissal was with prejudice, the three criminal charges cannot simply be refiled against the defendants.

The court also said there was no concern about prosecutorial harassment because the government itself sought dismissal with prejudice and the defendants who appeared before the court consented to it.

Also Read:

Rs 1.5 lakh crore investment in infra reflects commitment to nation-building: Gautam Adani at AGM