Gautam Adani states in a sworn affidavit that he was not aware of any promise or exchange connected to the DOJ’s move to dismiss the indictment. The case concerns alleged bribes and misleading investors, with the DOJ arguing dismissal based on legal considerations rather than investments.
India
-Oneindia Staff
Adani Group Chairman Gautam Adani has categorically denied that any promise, agreement or exchange influenced the US Department of Justice’s (DOJ) decision to seek dismissal of the criminal indictment against him, according to a sworn affidavit filed before a US court.
The affidavit was submitted in response to a July 8 order issued by the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York, which directed Adani to state under oath whether he was aware of any promise, offer, agreement or benefit connected to the DOJ’s motion to dismiss the case.
Gautam Adani states in a sworn affidavit that he was not aware of any promise or exchange connected to the DOJ’s move to dismiss the indictment. The case concerns alleged bribes and misleading investors, with the DOJ arguing dismissal based on legal considerations rather than investments.
In his affidavit, Adani said he was not aware of “anything promised, offered, sought, received, agreed to, or accepted” by anyone in relation to the dismissal of the indictment. He further denied any knowledge of an agreement involving an exchange of anything of value in return for dropping the criminal charges.
The criminal case was filed by the US Department of Justice in November 2024 during the Biden administration. It accused Gautam Adani and seven others of participating in an alleged scheme to pay nearly *USD 250 million in bribes* to Indian officials to secure power supply contracts and of misleading investors while raising funds in US markets. Adani has consistently denied all allegations.
Recently, the DOJ moved to dismiss the criminal proceedings *with prejudice*, which, if approved by the court, would permanently close the case and prevent it from being refiled.
Adani Rejects Investment Link
Addressing reports that the dismissal was linked to Adani Group’s proposed investments in the United States, Adani clarified that the group’s plan to invest *USD 10 billion* in the US had already been announced publicly on *November 13, 2024*, before the indictment became public.
According to the affidavit, Adani’s legal representatives from *Sullivan & Cromwell LLP* held meetings with officials from the DOJ and the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), submitting legal papers, expert reports and other materials in support of their case.
The affidavit stated that while the legal team informed US authorities that the proposed investment could potentially be considered as part of a resolution if the government chose to do so, the DOJ explicitly communicated that the investment proposal would not influence its decision on whether to seek dismissal. Adani reiterated that the proposed investment had no role in the department’s decision.
DOJ Also Denies Any Deal
The affidavit follows a filing made by the DOJ on July 4, in which prosecutors rejected media reports suggesting that the dismissal of the case was linked to investment commitments by the Adani Group. The department described such claims as false and maintained that its decision was based solely on legal and evidentiary considerations.
According to the DOJ, the alleged conduct primarily took place in India, there were no identified investor losses, and related matters were already under investigation by Indian authorities. It also noted that the indictment had been unsealed during the final days of the Biden administration, describing it as a “name-and-shame” action that was left for the incoming Donald Trump administration to address.
Court Seeks Greater Transparency
US District Judge Nicholas Garaufis had directed Gautam Adani to submit the affidavit before ruling on the DOJ’s request to dismiss the indictment. The judge sought clarity on whether any promise, arrangement or understanding existed between the government and the defendants in connection with the dismissal of the case.
The order came after Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General *R. Trent McCotter*, who described himself as the final and sole decision-maker on the dismissal, denied reports linking the DOJ’s move to Adani Group’s investment plans.
In his filing, McCotter stated that suggestions that the securities charges were dropped because of promised investments in the United States were “false.”
“I would have sought dismissal of the securities charges regardless of any mentions of investments,” he said, adding that the investment proposal “could not have played any role” in the decision.
McCotter argued that the securities fraud case was legally difficult to sustain because most of the alleged conduct occurred in India, Indian authorities had not identified actionable misconduct, investors had not suffered losses, key evidence and witnesses were located outside the United States, and the defendants were unlikely to appear before a US court.
He also stated that prosecution under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) no longer aligned with the enforcement priorities of the Trump administration, which focus on matters involving US national security, American companies and transnational criminal organisations.
Judge Yet to Rule on Dismissal
Despite the DOJ’s explanation, Judge Garaufis observed that McCotter’s filing raised, for the first time, the possibility that some form of agreement involving one or more defendants may have existed, even though no such arrangement had been disclosed to the court.
The judge noted that while Adani’s legal team had previously explained why the defendants consented to the government’s request for dismissal, they had not mentioned any agreement, including one involving future investments in the United States.
Before approving the government’s request under Rule 48(a), the court said it must be satisfied that the DOJ’s reasons for seeking dismissal are genuine and that no undisclosed agreement influenced its decision. The court is expected to decide on the DOJ’s motion after considering Adani’s affidavit and the submissions made by both sides.
