US court permanently dismisses criminal charges against Gautam Adani, nephew

A US court has permanently dismissed criminal charges against Adani Group chairman Gautam Adani, his nephew Sagar Adani and former Adani Green Energy CEO Vneet Jaain, ending 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 request under Rule 48(a) to dismiss the indictment, which included charges of securities-fraud conspiracy, wire-fraud conspiracy and securities fraud.

Judge Nicholas Garaufis approved the request after seeking further explanations from prosecutors about their decision to abandon the case. The dismissal was made with prejudice, meaning the charges cannot be brought again, although the decision does not constitute a judicial finding on the underlying allegations.

The case began in November 2024, when US prosecutors accused Gautam Adani, Sagar Adani, Vneet Jaain and others of conspiring to pay about $250 million in bribes to Indian government officials to secure solar power contracts expected to generate more than $2 billion in after-tax profits over two decades.

Prosecutors had also alleged that investors were misled while the group raised more than $3 billion through loans and bond offerings in US markets.

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

A separate civil case brought by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has also been resolved through a final judgment against Gautam Adani. He consented to the order without admitting the allegations and was required to pay a $6 million civil penalty to the SEC within 30 days.

In submissions to the court, the Trump administration argued that continuing the criminal prosecution was no longer in the interests of justice. It cited jurisdictional and evidentiary difficulties, the fact that the alleged conduct largely took place 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, 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 by the outgoing administration.

Before granting the dismissal, Garaufis ordered the Justice Department to publicly explain its reasons and directed the defendants to submit sworn declarations confirming that no promise, offer, quid pro quo or undisclosed agreement was linked to the government’s decision.

Gautam Adani, in his sworn declaration, categorically denied any such arrangement. After reviewing the government’s submissions and the declarations, the court accepted the dismissal request and permanently closed the case.

The judge said he was satisfied that Adani’s November 2024 pledge to invest $10 billion in the US had not influenced the Justice Department’s decision. He also noted that courts have a limited role in reviewing federal prosecutors’ decisions to abandon criminal charges.

Adani welcomed the decision, saying he did so “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,” he said in a post on X, adding that the group would continue focusing on building for India and creating long-term value.

The case ended before trial, meaning no witnesses were examined, evidence was not tested in court and the judge made no findings on the underlying criminal allegations.

The proceedings came amid wider scrutiny of the Adani Group following allegations by now-shuttered short seller Hindenburg Research in January 2023. The report triggered a sharp fall in Adani Group shares and wiped more than $150 billion from its market value at its lowest point. The group has consistently rejected those allegations.

In reviewing the Justice Department’s request, the court found that prosecutors had established sufficient legal grounds for dismissal on one key issue: their argument that certain statements concerning Adani Green’s anti-bribery policies and corporate compliance could constitute “inactionable puffery” — broad claims that investors could not reasonably rely upon.

Garaufis rejected or found insufficient several other arguments put forward by the government. These included its claim that the alleged misconduct occurred almost entirely in India, creating significant jurisdictional concerns under US securities laws.

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

The judge also found that the government’s argument regarding the absence of deception involving sophisticated investors did not independently provide sufficient grounds for dismissal. However, he said there was no need to decide the issue because the “puffery” argument was sufficient to dismiss all three counts.