The U.S. Department of Justice has dismissed securities-related charges against Gautam Adani, stating the decision was driven by legal merits and evidence, not potential US investments. The filing criticised anonymous-source reporting and highlighted jurisdictional and evidentiary weaknesses in the case, urging reliance on the official legal record.
India
-Oneindia Staff
The U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) has dismissed media speculation surrounding its decision to withdraw criminal charges against Gautam Adani, stating that reports linking the move to potential investments by Adani-related entities in the United States are “false” and unsupported by the facts.
In a filing submitted before a federal court, senior Justice Department official R. Trent McCotter said the decision to seek dismissal of the securities-related charges was made solely on the legal merits of the case and had been reached before any discussions about investments emerged. “That is false,” McCotter said in response to media reports suggesting the department’s decision was influenced by prospective investments in the United States.
The U.S. Department of Justice has dismissed securities-related charges against Gautam Adani, stating the decision was driven by legal merits and evidence, not potential US investments. The filing criticised anonymous-source reporting and highlighted jurisdictional and evidentiary weaknesses in the case, urging reliance on the official legal record.
According to the filing, McCotter stated that he “would have sought dismissal of the securities charges regardless of any mentions of investments,” stressing that the decision followed an extensive review of the evidence, legal arguments and submissions made by both prosecutors and defence lawyers.
The Justice Department also criticised reports based on anonymous sources, with McCotter questioning their credibility and accusing unnamed current and former department officials of leaking details of internal deliberations. “I assume the Court would never give credence to breathless reporting relying on anonymous sources,” the filing said.
The department argued that such reports overlooked what it described as significant weaknesses in the prosecution, including jurisdictional issues, the absence of investor losses, evidentiary challenges and parallel reviews conducted by authorities in India.
McCotter maintained that public discussion surrounding the case should be guided by the official legal record rather than anonymous claims circulated through the media.
In one of the filing’s strongest observations, the Justice Department said the alleged leaks had ultimately backfired by prompting a detailed public explanation of what it described as the “numerous catastrophic flaws” in the prosecution.
The filing concluded that media reports based on unnamed sources should not outweigh the department’s formal legal assessment that continuing the prosecution was no longer justified.
