US Judge Dismisses Criminal Charges Against Gautam Adani After Contentious DOJ Request
A federal judge in Brooklyn on Monday dismissed criminal fraud and bribery charges against Indian billionaire Gautam Adani, formally ending a high-profile prosecution that had loomed over one of India’s largest conglomerates for nearly two years. US District Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis of the Eastern District of New York granted the Justice Department’s request to drop the case against Adani and his nephew Sagar Adani, while sharply criticizing the manner in which senior department officials pursued the dismissal.
The ruling, issued in a detailed 47-page decision, marks the close of a case that began in the final weeks of the Biden administration and became a flashpoint under the second Trump administration. Adani, chairman of the Adani Group and one of the world’s richest individuals, had been accused of orchestrating a massive bribery scheme to secure solar energy contracts in India and then misleading American investors about the company’s practices.
The Original Allegations
In November 2024, federal prosecutors in Brooklyn unsealed a five-count indictment charging Gautam Adani, Sagar Adani, former Adani Green Energy executive Vneet Jaain, and several others with conspiracy to commit securities fraud, wire fraud, and related offenses. Prosecutors alleged that between roughly 2020 and 2024, the defendants agreed to pay more than $250 million in bribes to Indian government officials. The payments, they claimed, were designed to lock in power purchase agreements for a major solar energy project that was projected to generate more than $2 billion in after-tax profits over approximately 20 years.
According to the indictment, the scheme centered on contracts awarded by the Solar Energy Corporation of India for what was described as one of the world’s largest solar initiatives. Prosecutors said Adani and his associates promised substantial sums, including roughly $228 million linked to officials in the state of Andhra Pradesh, in exchange for state electricity distributors agreeing to buy the power. At the same time, the companies involved raised billions of dollars from US and international investors through syndicate loans and bond offerings. Those fundraising efforts, prosecutors alleged, relied on false and misleading statements that concealed the bribery scheme and portrayed the company’s anti-corruption controls as robust.
The Adani Group has consistently denied the allegations, describing them as baseless. Gautam Adani never appeared in a US court to answer the charges. The case also involved parallel civil proceedings brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission, which were later resolved through settlements.
The Decision to Drop the Case
In May 2026, the Justice Department moved to dismiss the indictment with prejudice, meaning the charges could not be refiled. Officials stated that after reviewing the matter, they had decided “in its prosecutorial discretion” not to devote further resources to the criminal charges against the individual defendants. The request was unusual enough that Judge Garaufis refused to approve it immediately. He described the government’s initial explanation as “terse,” “bland,” and “conclusory,” and ordered prosecutors to provide a fuller factual basis for abandoning a case that a grand jury had already approved.
The scrutiny intensified when reports surfaced that Adani’s lawyers, led by Robert J. Giuffra Jr. of Sullivan & Cromwell, had referenced the billionaire’s earlier pledge to invest $10 billion in the United States during discussions with the department. Adani had publicly announced that investment commitment in November 2024, shortly before the indictment was unsealed. Judge Garaufis later directed Adani himself to address under oath whether any agreement existed to exchange the investment or any other benefit for the dismissal of the charges.
In a sworn declaration filed in mid-July, Adani stated that he was not aware of any such agreement. He acknowledged the prior $10 billion pledge and noted that his lawyers had indicated the investment “might be part of a resolution of these matters” if the government was interested. However, he insisted that the Justice Department had made clear it would not consider the investment in deciding whether to seek dismissal, and that the pledge played no role in the outcome.
The Judge’s Criticism and Final Ruling
In his August 10 ruling, Judge Garaufis accepted the dismissal of the conspiracy, securities fraud, and wire fraud charges against Gautam Adani and Sagar Adani. He concluded that important elements of the original case were legally dubious and that he was satisfied the investment offer had not driven the department’s decision. The charges were dismissed with prejudice.
Yet the judge devoted significant portions of the opinion to criticizing the process that led to the dismissal. He focused particular attention on Trent McCotter, the principal associate deputy attorney general, who had taken primary responsibility for the effort to drop the case. Garaufis wrote that the irregularities surrounding the decision were “concerning.” He noted that McCotter appeared to have reached his conclusion largely in collaboration with defense counsel and seemingly without meaningful input from the FBI and SEC agents who investigated the matter or the prosecutors who originally brought the case.
The judge described this approach as “highly unusual” and said it reflected an alarming lack of respect for the judicial branch as a co-equal institution. He rejected McCotter’s suggestion that the original indictment had been brought as a political “name and shame” exercise in the closing days of the previous administration, calling that assertion baseless and “unbecoming of his office.” Garaufis also left certain remaining counts—related to foreign bribery and obstruction—open against other defendants, giving the government until the end of August to provide further justification if it still wished to dismiss those charges.
Adani’s Response and Broader Implications
Adani welcomed the decision in a statement posted on X. “I welcome the US court’s decision with humility and deep respect for the judicial process,” he wrote. “Throughout this challenging period, our faith in truth, fairness and the rule of law remained unwavering.” He thanked those who had maintained confidence in him and in India’s capacity for justice, adding that the group would continue focusing on building for the nation and creating lasting value.
The dismissal removes a significant legal cloud that had complicated Adani Group’s international expansion plans and ability to raise capital in Western markets. It also fits a broader pattern of the current Justice Department reviewing and, in some instances, stepping back from certain foreign bribery and white-collar prosecutions that originated under the prior administration. Legal observers note that while judges generally have limited power to force prosecutors to continue cases they no longer wish to pursue, Rule 48(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure still requires court approval for dismissal after an indictment has been returned—giving judges a narrow but meaningful role in scrutinizing the government’s reasoning.
For Adani, the outcome closes a chapter that began with a dramatic indictment and a sharp drop in the market value of group companies. Whether the resolution reflects a pure assessment of the evidence, a shift in enforcement priorities, or the cumulative weight of an intensive defense campaign involving hundreds of pages of submissions remains a matter of public debate. What is no longer in dispute is the formal legal status of the charges against Gautam Adani and his nephew: they have been dismissed.
About The Author
